| Message ID | pull.1638.git.1705008449995.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | push: improve consistency of output when "up to date" | expand |
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 4:27 PM Benji Kay via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote: > When one issues the pull command, one may see "Already up to date." > When issuing the push command, one may have seen "Everything up-to-date". > To improve consistency, "Everything up to date." is printed instead. > (The hyphens have been removed, and a period has been added.) > > Signed-off-by: okaybenji <okaybenji@gmail.com> Thanks. This particular change is proposed periodically... > diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c > @@ -1467,7 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, > else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) > - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); > + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); ... but has not been considered desirable. See, for instance, this email thread explaining the rationale for avoiding such a change: https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1298.git.1658908927714.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 09:27:29PM +0000, Benji Kay via GitGitGadget wrote: > From: okaybenji <okaybenji@gmail.com> > > When one issues the pull command, one may see "Already up to date." > When issuing the push command, one may have seen "Everything up-to-date". > To improve consistency, "Everything up to date." is printed instead. > (The hyphens have been removed, and a period has been added.) > > Signed-off-by: okaybenji <okaybenji@gmail.com> > --- > push: improve consistency of output when "up to date" > > Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1638%2Fokaybenji%2Fup-to-date-v1 > Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1638/okaybenji/up-to-date-v1 > Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1638 > > transport.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c > index bd7899e9bf5..c42cb4e58b4 100644 > --- a/transport.c > +++ b/transport.c > @@ -1467,7 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, > if (porcelain && !push_ret) > puts("Done"); > else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) > - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); > + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); Between the two, I have a vague preference towards "up-to-date", which would suggest changing the pull command's output to read "Already up-to-date". Personally I think that neither of them should include a period in their output, but whichever we decide should be done so consistently between the two. Also, should this string be marked for translation? Thanks, Taylor
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 4:44 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 09:27:29PM +0000, Benji Kay via GitGitGadget wrote: > > - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); > > + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); > > Between the two, I have a vague preference towards "up-to-date", which > would suggest changing the pull command's output to read "Already > up-to-date". Personally I think that neither of them should include a > period in their output, but whichever we decide should be done so > consistently between the two. > > Also, should this string be marked for translation? See: https://lore.kernel.org/git/7n9r5q74-9qr1-29sr-p2n5-943n01s0p78r@tzk.qr/
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > Thanks. This particular change is proposed periodically... > >> diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c >> @@ -1467,7 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, >> else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) >> - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); >> + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); > > ... but has not been considered desirable. > > See, for instance, this email thread explaining the rationale for > avoiding such a change: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1298.git.1658908927714.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/ Looking at the "grep" hits: $ git grep -e 'up-to-date.*"' \*.c builtin/rm.c: OPT__FORCE(&force, N_("override the up-to-date check"), PARSE_OPT_NOCOMPLETE), builtin/send-pack.c: fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); http-push.c: fprintf(stderr, "'%s': up-to-date\n", ref->name); http-push.c: "Maybe you are not up-to-date and " transport.c: fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); it is true that these are not marked for translation, which should be a clue enough that we want them to be exactly the way they are spelled. However, they are going to the standard error stream. Is it reasonable to expect third-party tools scraping it to find the string "up-to-date"? In any case, a safe first step is to add a short comment to each of these that should not be translated. Perhaps something along this line. ------- >8 ------------- >8 ------------- >8 ------- Subject: [PATCH] messages: mark some strings with "up-to-date" not to touch The treewide clean-up of "up-to-date" strings done in 7560f547 (treewide: correct several "up-to-date" to "up to date", 2017-08-23) deliberately left some out, but unlike the lines that were changed by the commit, the lines that were deliberately left untouched by the commit is impossible to ask "git blame" to link back to the commit that did not touch them. Let's do the second best thing, leave a short comment near them, to make it possible for those who are motivated enough to find out why we decided to tell them "do not modify". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> --- builtin/send-pack.c | 1 + http-push.c | 2 ++ transport.c | 1 + 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/builtin/send-pack.c b/builtin/send-pack.c index b7183be970..ac7ec1e643 100644 --- a/builtin/send-pack.c +++ b/builtin/send-pack.c @@ -333,6 +333,7 @@ int cmd_send_pack(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) } if (!ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) + /* do not modify this string */ fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); return ret; diff --git a/http-push.c b/http-push.c index b4d0b2a6aa..e4c6645cc2 100644 --- a/http-push.c +++ b/http-push.c @@ -1851,6 +1851,7 @@ int cmd_main(int argc, const char **argv) if (oideq(&ref->old_oid, &ref->peer_ref->new_oid)) { if (push_verbosely) + /* do not modify this string */ fprintf(stderr, "'%s': up-to-date\n", ref->name); if (helper_status) printf("ok %s up to date\n", ref->name); @@ -1871,6 +1872,7 @@ int cmd_main(int argc, const char **argv) * commits at the remote end and likely * we were not up to date to begin with. */ + /* do not modify this string */ error("remote '%s' is not an ancestor of\n" "local '%s'.\n" "Maybe you are not up-to-date and " diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c index bd7899e9bf..c9f39d45f1 100644 --- a/transport.c +++ b/transport.c @@ -1467,6 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, if (porcelain && !push_ret) puts("Done"); else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) + /* do not modify this string */ fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); done:
If it's important these messages are not changed (under the presumption some programs may make decisions based on the output), perhaps a test should be written to ensure the output is as expected.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 5:33 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > > Thanks. This particular change is proposed periodically... > > ... but has not been considered desirable. > > > > See, for instance, this email thread explaining the rationale for > > avoiding such a change: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1298.git.1658908927714.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/ > > Let's do the second best thing, leave a short comment near them, to > make it possible for those who are motivated enough to find out why > we decided to tell them "do not modify". > --- > diff --git a/builtin/send-pack.c b/builtin/send-pack.c > @@ -333,6 +333,7 @@ int cmd_send_pack(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) > if (!ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) > + /* do not modify this string */ > fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); Yes, that helps, though, we can probably be a bit more friendly to future developers. Rather than insisting that they dig through history, we could use a slightly less terse comment, such as: /* stable plumbing output; do not modify or localize */
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 02:33:21PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > > > Thanks. This particular change is proposed periodically... > > > >> diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c > >> @@ -1467,7 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, > >> else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) > >> - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); > >> + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); > > > > ... but has not been considered desirable. > > > > See, for instance, this email thread explaining the rationale for > > avoiding such a change: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1298.git.1658908927714.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/ > > Looking at the "grep" hits: > > $ git grep -e 'up-to-date.*"' \*.c > builtin/rm.c: OPT__FORCE(&force, N_("override the up-to-date check"), PARSE_OPT_NOCOMPLETE), > builtin/send-pack.c: fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); > http-push.c: fprintf(stderr, "'%s': up-to-date\n", ref->name); > http-push.c: "Maybe you are not up-to-date and " > transport.c: fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); > > it is true that these are not marked for translation, which should > be a clue enough that we want them to be exactly the way they are > spelled. However, they are going to the standard error stream. Is > it reasonable to expect third-party tools scraping it to find the > string "up-to-date"? I would say it's not entirely reasonable: - These are strings that users see frequently, and if they are not proficient in the English language I think it actually regresses their user experience. - The way this string is written would never lead me, as a script developer, to think that this is a message that should be parsed by my script. It's simply too user-focussed to make me think so. - Last but not least, I think it's not entirely unreasonable to ask script developers to use e.g. LANG=C when they expect strings to be stable. Also, with the introduction of `git push --porcelain`, I think there is even less reason to keep such user-visible strings intact. Any machine that wants to parse output of git-push(1) should use `--porcelain` instead in my opinion. Patrick
On 2024-01-11 22:43, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 09:27:29PM +0000, Benji Kay via GitGitGadget > wrote: >> From: okaybenji <okaybenji@gmail.com> >> >> When one issues the pull command, one may see "Already up to date." >> When issuing the push command, one may have seen "Everything >> up-to-date". >> To improve consistency, "Everything up to date." is printed instead. >> (The hyphens have been removed, and a period has been added.) >> >> Signed-off-by: okaybenji <okaybenji@gmail.com> >> --- >> push: improve consistency of output when "up to date" >> >> Published-As: >> https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1638%2Fokaybenji%2Fup-to-date-v1 >> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git >> pr-1638/okaybenji/up-to-date-v1 >> Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1638 >> >> transport.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c >> index bd7899e9bf5..c42cb4e58b4 100644 >> --- a/transport.c >> +++ b/transport.c >> @@ -1467,7 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, >> if (porcelain && !push_ret) >> puts("Done"); >> else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) >> - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); >> + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); > > Between the two, I have a vague preference towards "up-to-date", which > would suggest changing the pull command's output to read "Already > up-to-date". Personally I think that neither of them should include a > period in their output, but whichever we decide should be done so > consistently between the two. I'm not a native English speaker, but I spent years contributing to English Wikipedia. According to the manual of style employed by Wikipedia, which is based mainly on The Chicago Manual of Style, hyphenated forms should not be used at the ends of sentences, or at the ends of sentence-like forms. In this case, we don't have complete sentences. [1] https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html
diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c index bd7899e9bf5..c42cb4e58b4 100644 --- a/transport.c +++ b/transport.c @@ -1467,7 +1467,7 @@ int transport_push(struct repository *r, if (porcelain && !push_ret) puts("Done"); else if (!quiet && !ret && !transport_refs_pushed(remote_refs)) - fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n"); + fprintf(stderr, "Everything up to date.\n"); done: free_refs(local_refs);