From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Merge made by recursive? Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 15:50:32 -0400 Message-ID: <20110525195032.GC27260@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <7vvcwy37de.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Shawn Ligocki , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 25 21:50:41 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QPK6K-0006v7-GA for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 25 May 2011 21:50:40 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754770Ab1EYTuf (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 15:50:35 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:39925 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753922Ab1EYTue (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 15:50:34 -0400 Received: (qmail 4684 invoked by uid 107); 25 May 2011 19:50:34 -0000 Received: from sigill-wired.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.8) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Wed, 25 May 2011 15:50:34 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 25 May 2011 15:50:32 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vvcwy37de.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:30:53PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I think so. An earlier version of "git merge" used to say something like: > > Committed merge ..., made by resolve. > > back in Sept 2005, so it is not so recent development. If we change it > now, scripts in thousands of existing users hands might cringe instead, > though. I was going to say "those scripts are stupid and broken for parsing stderr", but: 1. We actually write this (and many other diagnostic messages) to stdout, not stderr. That seems weird and unusual. 2. The message ends up in the reflog. Also, most of the rest of the merge output has been gettext-ized, but not this message. If we are going to declare it not parseable, should we also be internationalizing it? -Peff