On Fri, Aug 19 2022, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Ævar,
>
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 18 2022, Michael J Gruber wrote:
>>
>> > Traditionally, reflog messages were never translated, in particular not
>> > on storage.
>> >
>> > Due to the switch of more parts of git to the sequencer, old changes in
>> > the sequencer code may lead to recent changes in git's behaviour. E.g.:
>> > c28cbc5ea6 ("sequencer: mark action_name() for translation", 2016-10-21)
>> > marked several uses of `action_name()` for translation. Recently, this
>> > lead to a partially translated reflog:
>> >
>> > `rebase: fast-forward` is translated (e.g. in de to `Rebase: Vorspulen`)
>> > whereas other reflog entries such as `rebase (pick):` remain
>> > untranslated as they should be.
>> >
>> > Change the relevant line in the sequencer so that this reflog entry
>> > remains untranslated, as well.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > sequencer.c | 2 +-
>> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
>> > index 5f22b7cd37..51d75dfbe1 100644
>> > --- a/sequencer.c
>> > +++ b/sequencer.c
>> > @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ static int fast_forward_to(struct repository *r,
>> > if (checkout_fast_forward(r, from, to, 1))
>> > return -1; /* the callee should have complained already */
>> >
>> > - strbuf_addf(&sb, _("%s: fast-forward"), _(action_name(opts)));
>> > + strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s: fast-forward", action_name(opts));
>> >
>> > transaction = ref_transaction_begin(&err);
>> > if (!transaction ||
>>
>> I 95% agree with this direction, but the other 5% of me is thinking
>> "isn't this fine then? Let's keep it?".
>
> No, it's not fine, we mustn't keep it, because we expect Git itself to
> parse the reflog.
Doesn't that also mean that the relevant functionality is now also (and
still?) broken on any repository where these translations ended up
on-disk?
