On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 12:18 PM Tao Klerks <tao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:04 PM Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > May be we can use "updates" instead of "touches" ? > > > > "In '%s', CRLF will be replaced by LF the next time Git updates it" > > Makes sense to me. I don't like this wording as much because "update" could more easily be taken to mean something that happens in the index or in a commit, not in the working directory. But maybe it needs more clarification anyway, e.g. "In the working copy of '%s'..." Ævar, would the phrase "In the working copy" resolve your concern about the new message "[not offering] the working directory advice at all"? > > Or may be > > > > "In '%s', CRLF will be replaced by LF the next time a `git checkout` updates it" > > > > I believe we should stay away from the word "checkout" because it's > neither accurate nor clear, for at least a couple of reasons: > 1. We have long, in principle, been promoting the use of "git switch", > and it's not obvious in a message like this one that this is > considered to be equivalent. > 2. Files can be touched/updated by other commands/processes, like "git > pull" (and "rebase", and probably others I can't think of) I agree: Talking about the `git checkout` command is too specific. -Alex
