| Message ID | pull.1669.git.1708442603395.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | rebase: make warning less passive aggressive | expand |
"Harmen Stoppels via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > From: Harmen Stoppels <me@harmenstoppels.nl> > > When you run `git rebase --continue` when no rebase is in progress, git > outputs `fatal: no rebase in progress?` which is not a question but a > statement. This commit makes it appear as a statement. "This commit makes it appear" -> "Make it appear" (see SubmittingPatches). > builtin/rebase.c | 2 +- This change is very good, but a commit that touches code should not touch po/ localizations in this project. They are updated to match the code change by respective language teams. > po/bg.po | 2 +- > po/ca.po | 2 +- > po/de.po | 2 +- > po/el.po | 2 +- > po/es.po | 2 +- > po/fr.po | 2 +- > po/id.po | 2 +- > po/it.po | 2 +- > po/ko.po | 2 +- > po/pl.po | 2 +- > po/pt_PT.po | 2 +- > po/ru.po | 2 +- > po/sv.po | 2 +- > po/tr.po | 2 +- > po/uk.po | 2 +- > po/vi.po | 2 +- > po/zh_CN.po | 2 +- > po/zh_TW.po | 2 +- > 19 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c > index 5b086f651a6..415783c4a21 100644 > --- a/builtin/rebase.c > +++ b/builtin/rebase.c > @@ -1254,7 +1254,7 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) > die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--root", "--fork-point"); > > if (options.action != ACTION_NONE && !in_progress) > - die(_("No rebase in progress?")); > + die(_("No rebase in progress")); > > if (options.action == ACTION_EDIT_TODO && !is_merge(&options)) > die(_("The --edit-todo action can only be used during " Interestingly this change does not break any test in t/ directory, which means we have a gap in test coverage. It should not be any part of this patch, but we may want to add a test to exercise this codepath (#leftoverbits). Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 03:23:21PM +0000, Harmen Stoppels via GitGitGadget wrote: > From: Harmen Stoppels <me@harmenstoppels.nl> > > When you run `git rebase --continue` when no rebase is in progress, git > outputs `fatal: no rebase in progress?` which is not a question but a > statement. This commit makes it appear as a statement. > > Signed-off-by: Harmen Stoppels <me@harmenstoppels.nl> > --- > rebase: make warning less passive aggressive > > Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1669%2Fhaampie%2Ffix%2Fpassive-agressive-message-v1 > Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1669/haampie/fix/passive-agressive-message-v1 > Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1669 > > builtin/rebase.c | 2 +- > po/bg.po | 2 +- > po/ca.po | 2 +- > po/de.po | 2 +- > po/el.po | 2 +- > po/es.po | 2 +- > po/fr.po | 2 +- > po/id.po | 2 +- > po/it.po | 2 +- > po/ko.po | 2 +- > po/pl.po | 2 +- > po/pt_PT.po | 2 +- > po/ru.po | 2 +- > po/sv.po | 2 +- > po/tr.po | 2 +- > po/uk.po | 2 +- > po/vi.po | 2 +- > po/zh_CN.po | 2 +- > po/zh_TW.po | 2 +- > 19 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c > index 5b086f651a6..415783c4a21 100644 > --- a/builtin/rebase.c > +++ b/builtin/rebase.c > @@ -1254,7 +1254,7 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) > die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--root", "--fork-point"); > > if (options.action != ACTION_NONE && !in_progress) > - die(_("No rebase in progress?")); > + die(_("No rebase in progress")); While we're at it changing this message, do we also want to convert it to start with a lower-case letter so that it aligns with our error message style? Patrick
Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes: >> if (options.action != ACTION_NONE && !in_progress) >> - die(_("No rebase in progress?")); >> + die(_("No rebase in progress")); > > While we're at it changing this message, do we also want to convert it > to start with a lower-case letter so that it aligns with our error > message style? Good eyes. Thanks for a good suggestion.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 09:29:13AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Harmen Stoppels via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > > > From: Harmen Stoppels <me@harmenstoppels.nl> > > > > When you run `git rebase --continue` when no rebase is in progress, git > > outputs `fatal: no rebase in progress?` which is not a question but a > > statement. This commit makes it appear as a statement. > > "This commit makes it appear" -> "Make it appear" (see > SubmittingPatches). > > > builtin/rebase.c | 2 +- > > This change is very good, but a commit that touches code should not > touch po/ localizations in this project. They are updated to match > the code change by respective language teams. Or if it does touch the po files it could as well update the translations. There are changes that can be trivially translated without any knowledge of the target language. Thanks Michal
Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@suse.de> writes: > Or if it does touch the po files it could as well update the > translations. > > There are changes that can be trivially translated without any knowledge > of the target language. You need to know the target language before deciding it is OK and sufficient to just remove ̉¿? from around a sentence to make it from a question to a statement of a fact. You may know enough, but reviewers may not be. In addition, it would allow bypassing the language teams, which is the most serious problem I see in such an attitude.
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@suse.de> writes: > >> Or if it does touch the po files it could as well update the >> translations. >> >> There are changes that can be trivially translated without any knowledge >> of the target language. > > You need to know the target language before deciding it is OK and > sufficient to just remove ̉¿? from around a sentence to make it from > a question to a statement of a fact. You may know enough, but > reviewers may not be. In addition, it would allow bypassing the > language teams, which is the most serious problem I see in such an > attitude. Oops, "attitude" -> "approach".
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:02:04AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > > > Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@suse.de> writes: > > > >> Or if it does touch the po files it could as well update the > >> translations. > >> > >> There are changes that can be trivially translated without any knowledge > >> of the target language. > > > > You need to know the target language before deciding it is OK and > > sufficient to just remove ̉¿? from around a sentence to make it from > > a question to a statement of a fact. You may know enough, but > > reviewers may not be. In addition, it would allow bypassing the > > language teams, which is the most serious problem I see in such an > > attitude. > > Oops, "attitude" -> "approach". That's certainly true that even if you know how to remove a question mark you may not find a reviewer who knows how to remove one. Nonetheless, if you do find both a patch author and a reviewer that know how to remove a question mark what is the problem with not involving several language teams to remove a question mark? Thanks Michal
On Wednesday, 21 February 2024 19:30:18 CET Michal Suchánek wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:02:04AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > > > > > Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@suse.de> writes: > > > > > >> Or if it does touch the po files it could as well update the > > >> translations. > > >> > > >> There are changes that can be trivially translated without any knowledge > > >> of the target language. > > > > > > You need to know the target language before deciding it is OK and > > > sufficient to just remove ̉¿? from around a sentence to make it from > > > a question to a statement of a fact. You may know enough, but > > > reviewers may not be. In addition, it would allow bypassing the > > > language teams, which is the most serious problem I see in such an > > > attitude. > > > > Oops, "attitude" -> "approach". > > That's certainly true that even if you know how to remove a question > mark you may not find a reviewer who knows how to remove one. > > Nonetheless, if you do find both a patch author and a reviewer that know > how to remove a question mark what is the problem with not involving > several language teams to remove a question mark? > > Thanks > > Michal > > As a translator, I'm less bothered by editing a sentence to remove a question mark (maybe enforcing a language style and reformulating the sentence by the way), than by translating again and again similar sentences. Thanks JN
Jean-Noël AVILA <jn.avila@free.fr> writes: > As a translator, I'm less bothered by editing a sentence to remove a question > mark (maybe enforcing a language style and reformulating the sentence by the > way), than by translating again and again similar sentences. Sure, but if the original in C locale used to be "FOO BAR?" and you translated it to "foo bar?" in your language, and then a patch updates the string in the source to "FOO BAR", doesn't msgmerge notice that the original as a "fuzzy" matching and offer you something like # fuzzy msgid "FOO BAR" msgstr "foo bar?" so that all you have to do is to remove '?' anyway? So I do not think you'd need to translate the "FOO BAR" part again and again. But the above assumes that for your language, the ONLY thing to turn such a rhetorical "passive aggressive" question into grammatically correct statement of a fact is to remove the question mark. It may not be universally true for all languages, and for some language, even after msgmerge did its job correctly, you may need to do more than just removing the question mark to adjust the remaining "foo bar" part.
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > Jean-Noël AVILA <jn.avila@free.fr> writes: > >> As a translator, I'm less bothered by editing a sentence to remove a question >> mark (maybe enforcing a language style and reformulating the sentence by the >> way), than by translating again and again similar sentences. > > Sure, but if the original in C locale used to be "FOO BAR?" and you > translated it to "foo bar?" in your language, and then a patch > updates the string in the source to "FOO BAR", doesn't msgmerge > notice that the original as a "fuzzy" matching and offer you > something like > > #, fuzzy > msgid "FOO BAR" > msgstr "foo bar?" > > so that all you have to do is to remove '?' anyway? So I do not > think you'd need to translate the "FOO BAR" part again and again. > > But the above assumes that for your language, the ONLY thing to turn > such a rhetorical "passive aggressive" question into grammatically > correct statement of a fact is to remove the question mark. It may > not be universally true for all languages, and for some language, > even after msgmerge did its job correctly, you may need to do more > than just removing the question mark to adjust the remaining "foo > bar" part. Hopefully the last message on this topic from me. I just tried this: * apply v2 of "No rebase in progress?" -> "no rebase in progress" patch from Harmen. This only changed _("") string, without touching any po/* files. * follow po/README.md and pretend as if I were a po/es.po team member, which involved running the command: $ make po-update PO_FILE=po/es.po * view the resulting po/es.po, which will be the starting point of a new translation. $ git diff po/es.po The last one showed me this snippet: -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +#: builtin/rebase.c:1257 +#, fuzzy +msgid "no rebase in progress" msgstr "¿No hay rebase en progreso?" The "#, fuzzy" thing is a signal that an old msgid has been updated and corresponding msgstr may need to be updated. The primary problem I had with Harmen's v1 was that it touched po/ file in the first place (which was corrected in v2), but the updates to po files it did looked like so: -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "¿No hay rebase en progreso?" Notice the lack of "#, fuzzy" marking? If v1 were accepted with these changes, then the "po-update" step I showed earlier would have produced something like this instead: +#: builtin/rebase.c:1257 msgid "no rebase in progress" msgstr "¿No hay rebase en progreso?" As msgid alone was updated already, the "po-update" step has no idea that the translated msgstr is out of date. We do not get the helpful "#, fuzzy" comment to tell the translator which msgstr is out of date and needs attention. So it is another reason why we want the developers to concentrate only on writing good C-locale messages inside _("") and N_(""), without touching po/ directory at all. It would avoid making changes that can confuse toolchain l10n people rely on (like the presence of "fuzzy" comments).
On Wednesday, 21 February 2024 23:46:10 CET Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jean-Noël AVILA <jn.avila@free.fr> writes: > > > As a translator, I'm less bothered by editing a sentence to remove a question > > mark (maybe enforcing a language style and reformulating the sentence by the > > way), than by translating again and again similar sentences. > > Sure, but if the original in C locale used to be "FOO BAR?" and you > translated it to "foo bar?" in your language, and then a patch > updates the string in the source to "FOO BAR", doesn't msgmerge > notice that the original as a "fuzzy" matching and offer you > something like > > # fuzzy > msgid "FOO BAR" > msgstr "foo bar?" > > so that all you have to do is to remove '?' anyway? Yes, it works as expected. > So I do not > think you'd need to translate the "FOO BAR" part again and again. Sorry for not being clear: I don't consider changing a question to an assertion is translating "again and again". This change is completely entitled to end up on translators desk, because it involves possibly changing the whole structure of the sentence. About "again and again", I was more refering to strings such as "could not stat '%s'" and then "could not stat file '%s'". > > But the above assumes that for your language, the ONLY thing to turn > such a rhetorical "passive aggressive" question into grammatically > correct statement of a fact is to remove the question mark. It may > not be universally true for all languages, and for some language, > even after msgmerge did its job correctly, you may need to do more > than just removing the question mark to adjust the remaining "foo > bar" part. > I perfectly agree with you. Thanks
Hello, On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:01:59AM +0100, Jean-Noël AVILA wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 February 2024 23:46:10 CET Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jean-Noël AVILA <jn.avila@free.fr> writes: > > > > > As a translator, I'm less bothered by editing a sentence to remove a > question > > > mark (maybe enforcing a language style and reformulating the sentence by > the > > > way), than by translating again and again similar sentences. Indeed, the style part is the key here. The message that is changed here was quite stylistically poorly written which is why only removing the question mark is correct, and it's why it's changed in the first place, too. While this is faithfully reflected in multiple language translations there is no saying that's the case for all languages, at least basic understanding of the grammar of the language in question is needed to verify that. > > But the above assumes that for your language, the ONLY thing to turn > > such a rhetorical "passive aggressive" question into grammatically > > correct statement of a fact is to remove the question mark. It may > > not be universally true for all languages, and for some language, > > even after msgmerge did its job correctly, you may need to do more > > than just removing the question mark to adjust the remaining "foo > > bar" part. > > > > I perfectly agree with you. Indeed, and that's why per-language review for such change is needed. Thanks Michal
Jean-Noël AVILA <jn.avila@free.fr> writes: > About "again and again", I was more refering to strings such as "could not > stat '%s'" and then "could not stat file '%s'". I completely agree with that. But the message you responded was not about that kind of burden to translators. It was arguing that it somehow is better to update the in-code _("string") at the same time as updating msgid and msgstr in the same patch (it may not have been directly "arguing for", but essentially doing so with a rhetorical question). So your "I do not want to translate again and again" thrown into that context utterly confused me. I didn't quite see how the "everything in one patch" approach would help translaters by not having them translate "again and again". Thanks for clearing my confusion.
diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c index 5b086f651a6..415783c4a21 100644 --- a/builtin/rebase.c +++ b/builtin/rebase.c @@ -1254,7 +1254,7 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--root", "--fork-point"); if (options.action != ACTION_NONE && !in_progress) - die(_("No rebase in progress?")); + die(_("No rebase in progress")); if (options.action == ACTION_EDIT_TODO && !is_merge(&options)) die(_("The --edit-todo action can only be used during " diff --git a/po/bg.po b/po/bg.po index 6b95addef41..e54a2abf94a 100644 --- a/po/bg.po +++ b/po/bg.po @@ -10782,7 +10782,7 @@ msgstr "" "„preserve“.\n" "Тази стойност вече не се поддържа, заменете я с „merges“." -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Изглежда в момента не тече пребазиране" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/ca.po b/po/ca.po index bcb4da80fb9..2bcda556147 100644 --- a/po/ca.po +++ b/po/ca.po @@ -10390,7 +10390,7 @@ msgstr "" "Nota: la configuració «pull.rebase» també podria estar establerta a\n" "+-«preserve», que ja no s'admet; utilitzeu «merge» en el seu lloc" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "No hi ha un «rebase» en curs?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/de.po b/po/de.po index 37d6c809983..7ea1dd5b1a0 100644 --- a/po/de.po +++ b/po/de.po @@ -10522,7 +10522,7 @@ msgstr "" "'preserve' gesetzt, was nicht länger unterstützt wird; nutzen Sie\n" "stattdessen 'merges'" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Kein Rebase im Gange?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/el.po b/po/el.po index 703f46d0c7c..d68d2542a4f 100644 --- a/po/el.po +++ b/po/el.po @@ -15726,7 +15726,7 @@ msgid "It looks like 'git am' is in progress. Cannot rebase." msgstr "" #: builtin/rebase.c:1208 git-legacy-rebase.sh:406 -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "" #: builtin/rebase.c:1212 git-legacy-rebase.sh:417 diff --git a/po/es.po b/po/es.po index 1ff5ff3911d..55fb9e0c81d 100644 --- a/po/es.po +++ b/po/es.po @@ -10109,7 +10109,7 @@ msgstr "" "configurada a 'preserve', el cual ya no es soportado; usa 'merges' en\n" "su lugar" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "¿No hay rebase en progreso?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/fr.po b/po/fr.po index 736a90f6bb6..cae2b1dd12b 100644 --- a/po/fr.po +++ b/po/fr.po @@ -10495,7 +10495,7 @@ msgstr "" "Note : votre configuration `pull.rebase` peut aussi être 'preserve',\n" "qui n'est plus géré ; utilisez 'merges' à la place" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Pas de rebasage en cours ?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/id.po b/po/id.po index 3e8b212b617..966ebb9a269 100644 --- a/po/id.po +++ b/po/id.po @@ -12843,7 +12843,7 @@ msgstr "" "yang tidak lagi didukung; gunakan 'merges' sebagai gantinya" #: builtin/rebase.c -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Tidak ada pendasaran ulang yang sedang berjalan?" #: builtin/rebase.c diff --git a/po/it.po b/po/it.po index c31560834d8..1b1ca2d2990 100644 --- a/po/it.po +++ b/po/it.po @@ -19666,7 +19666,7 @@ msgid "cannot combine '--root' with '--fork-point'" msgstr "impossibile combinare '--root' con '--fork-point'" #: builtin/rebase.c:1495 -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Nessun rebase in corso?" #: builtin/rebase.c:1499 diff --git a/po/ko.po b/po/ko.po index 5d190e52380..783d5c5e8ad 100644 --- a/po/ko.po +++ b/po/ko.po @@ -16245,7 +16245,7 @@ msgid "It looks like 'git am' is in progress. Cannot rebase." msgstr "'git am'이 진행 중인 것처럼 보입니다. 리베이스할 수 없습니다." #: git-rebase.sh:403 -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "리베이스가 진행 중이지 않습니다" #: git-rebase.sh:414 diff --git a/po/pl.po b/po/pl.po index 0ec127e14cc..5f361d558ba 100644 --- a/po/pl.po +++ b/po/pl.po @@ -20449,7 +20449,7 @@ msgid "cannot combine '--root' with '--fork-point'" msgstr "„--root” i „--fork-point” się wykluczają" #: builtin/rebase.c:1202 -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Nie trwa żadne przestawianie?" #: builtin/rebase.c:1206 diff --git a/po/pt_PT.po b/po/pt_PT.po index 32142531bbd..6adae673fd3 100644 --- a/po/pt_PT.po +++ b/po/pt_PT.po @@ -20608,7 +20608,7 @@ msgid "--preserve-merges was replaced by --rebase-merges" msgstr "" #: builtin/rebase.c:1230 -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Algum rebase em curso?" #: builtin/rebase.c:1234 diff --git a/po/ru.po b/po/ru.po index 3e56eb546ea..ebcd6dded70 100644 --- a/po/ru.po +++ b/po/ru.po @@ -9986,7 +9986,7 @@ msgid "" "which is no longer supported; use 'merges' instead" msgstr "" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Нет перемещения в процессе?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/sv.po b/po/sv.po index 786c2f749e7..d11bd0fc59c 100644 --- a/po/sv.po +++ b/po/sv.po @@ -10153,7 +10153,7 @@ msgstr "" "Observera: Din inställning för ”pull.rebase” kan också vara satt till\n" "”preserve”, som inte längre stöds; använd ”merges” istället" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Ingen ombasering pågår?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/tr.po b/po/tr.po index 19d6661bbe6..d568956c686 100644 --- a/po/tr.po +++ b/po/tr.po @@ -10278,7 +10278,7 @@ msgstr "" "Not: `pull.rebase` yapılandırmanız, artık desteklenmeyen'\n" "'preserve' olarak ayarlı olabilir; yerine 'merges' kullanın" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Sürmekte olan bir yeniden temellendirme yok" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/uk.po b/po/uk.po index 0507e387bab..cd09d641817 100644 --- a/po/uk.po +++ b/po/uk.po @@ -10341,7 +10341,7 @@ msgstr "" "значення \"preserve\",\n" "який більше не підтримується; натомість використовуйте \"merges\"" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Перебазування не відбувається?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/vi.po b/po/vi.po index d673745ac5b..869fb735c83 100644 --- a/po/vi.po +++ b/po/vi.po @@ -9963,7 +9963,7 @@ msgstr "" "'preserve',\n" "cái mà giờ không còn được hỗ trợ nữa; dùng 'merges' để thay thế" -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "Không có tiến trình rebase nào phải không?" msgid "The --edit-todo action can only be used during interactive rebase." diff --git a/po/zh_CN.po b/po/zh_CN.po index 39efaf1012a..60ca9ffb2cb 100644 --- a/po/zh_CN.po +++ b/po/zh_CN.po @@ -12723,7 +12723,7 @@ msgstr "" "取而代之请使用 'merges'" #: builtin/rebase.c -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "没有正在进行的变基？" #: builtin/rebase.c diff --git a/po/zh_TW.po b/po/zh_TW.po index 312dd128a41..5794e3f36fc 100644 --- a/po/zh_TW.po +++ b/po/zh_TW.po @@ -12603,7 +12603,7 @@ msgstr "" "請改用 “merges”" #: builtin/rebase.c -msgid "No rebase in progress?" +msgid "No rebase in progress" msgstr "沒有正在進行的重定基底？" #: builtin/rebase.c