On Thu, Sep 16 2021, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> Mark user-faced strings as translatable (including PR message output).
>
> Cc: Ryan Anderson <ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: vmiklos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: bedhanger@xxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> git-request-pull.sh | 29 ++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/git-request-pull.sh b/git-request-pull.sh
> index 9e1d2be9eb..8aa3a3f342 100755
> --- a/git-request-pull.sh
> +++ b/git-request-pull.sh
> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ test -n "$base" && test -n "$url" || usage
> baserev=$(git rev-parse --verify --quiet "$base"^0)
> if test -z "$baserev"
> then
> - die "fatal: Not a valid revision: $base"
> + die "$(eval_gettext "fatal: Not a valid revision: \$base")"
> fi
>
> #
> @@ -58,12 +58,12 @@ head=${head:-$(git show-ref --heads --tags "$local" | cut -d' ' -f2)}
> head=${head:-$(git rev-parse --quiet --verify "$local")}
>
> # None of the above? Bad.
> -test -z "$head" && die "fatal: Not a valid revision: $local"
> +test -z "$head" && die "$(eval_gettext "fatal: Not a valid revision: \$local")"
>
> # This also verifies that the resulting head is unique:
> # "git show-ref" could have shown multiple matching refs..
> headrev=$(git rev-parse --verify --quiet "$head"^0)
> -test -z "$headrev" && die "fatal: Ambiguous revision: $local"
> +test -z "$headrev" && die "$(eval_gettext "fatal: Ambiguous revision: \$local")"
>
> local_sha1=$(git rev-parse --verify --quiet "$head")
>
> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ then
> fi
>
> merge_base=$(git merge-base $baserev $headrev) ||
> -die "fatal: No commits in common between $base and $head"
> +die "$(eval_gettext "fatal: No commits in common between \$base and \$head")"
Looks good.
> # $head is the refname from the command line.
> # Find a ref with the same name as $head that exists at the remote
> @@ -120,13 +120,13 @@ remote_or_head=${remote:-HEAD}
>
> if test -z "$ref"
> then
> - echo "warn: No match for commit $headrev found at $url" >&2
> - echo "warn: Are you sure you pushed '$remote_or_head' there?" >&2
> + echo "$(eval_gettext "warn: No match for commit \$headrev found at \$url")" >&2
> + echo "$(eval_gettext "warn: Are you sure you pushed '\$remote_or_head' there?")" >&2
> status=1
> elif test "$local_sha1" != "$remote_sha1"
> then
> - echo "warn: $head found at $url but points to a different object" >&2
> - echo "warn: Are you sure you pushed '$remote_or_head' there?" >&2
> + echo "$(eval_gettext "warn: \$head found at \$url but points to a different object")" >&2
> + echo "$(eval_gettext "warn: Are you sure you pushed '\$remote_or_head' there?")" >&2
> status=1
> fi
Messages like these should probably be combined into one this one's
mostly on the edge, but the "are you sure" reads like a continuation of
the "no match for" or "$head found at" sentence, so translators may want
to re-orderthat wording...
> @@ -138,19 +138,22 @@ fi
>
> url=$(git ls-remote --get-url "$url")
>
> -git show -s --format='The following changes since commit %H:
> +git show -s --format="
> +$(gettext 'The following changes since commit %H:
>
The newline added at the start here looks like a bug or unrelated
change.
> %s (%ci)
>
> are available in the Git repository at:
> -' $merge_base &&
> +')
> +" $merge_base &&
And this likewise looks like an unrelated formatting change.
> echo " $url $pretty_remote" &&
> -git show -s --format='
> +git show -s --format="
> +$(gettext '
And likewise here maybe we want to include the first \n?
> for you to fetch changes up to %H:
>
> %s (%ci)
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------' $headrev &&
> +----------------------------------------------------------------')" $headrev &&
>
> if test $(git cat-file -t "$head") = tag
> then
> @@ -162,7 +165,7 @@ fi &&
>
> if test -n "$branch_name"
> then
> - echo "(from the branch description for $branch_name local branch)"
> + echo "$(eval_gettext "(from the branch description for \$branch_name local branch)")"
> echo
> git config "branch.$branch_name.description"
> echo "----------------------------------------------------------------"
The rest looks good/correct,
