Re: [PATCH 10/22] sequencer: avoid completely different messages for different actions

Hi Kuba,

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:

CC-ed to Jiang Xin, L10N coordinator.

W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:05, Johannes Schindelin pisze:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <redacted>
---
 sequencer.c | 7 ++-----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index cbdce6d..1b65202 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c

@@ -232,11 +232,8 @@ static int error_dirty_index(struct replay_opts *opts)
 	if (read_cache_unmerged())
 		return error_resolve_conflict(action_name(opts));
 
-	/* Different translation strings for cherry-pick and revert */
-	if (opts->action == REPLAY_PICK)
-		error(_("Your local changes would be overwritten by cherry-pick."));
-	else
-		error(_("Your local changes would be overwritten by revert."));
+	error(_("Your local changes would be overwritten by %s."),
+		action_name(opts));

If I understand it correctly, it would make "revert" or "cherry-pick"
untranslated part of error message.  You would need to use translation
on the result with "_(action_name(opts))", you would have to mark
todo_command_strings elements for gettext lexicon with N_(...).

I am rather against this change (see also below).

Okay.

Unfortunately, I have to focus on the correctness of the code at the
moment (and Git for Windows does ship *without* translations for the time
being anyway, mostly to save on space, but also because users complained).

So I will take care of this after v2.10.0.

For the record, how is this supposed to be handled, in particular when I
introduce a new action whose action_name(opts) will be "rebase -i"? Do I
really need to repeat myself three times?

Ciao,
Dscho