From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] For Real - Fixed pluralization in diff reports Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 12:38:12 -0600 Message-ID: <20110801183812.GA16438@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <4E362F8E.1050105@gmail.com> <4E36B8E4.5080900@gmail.com> <20110801180603.GB10636@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4E36F025.9040100@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Jon Forrest , git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Sverre Rabbelier X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Aug 01 20:38:21 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 1QnxNc-0006Fp-I2 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:38:20 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752793Ab1HASiQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2011 14:38:16 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:58462 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752780Ab1HASiP (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2011 14:38:15 -0400 Received: (qmail 22630 invoked by uid 107); 1 Aug 2011 18:38:48 -0000 Received: from S010690840de80b38.ss.shawcable.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (70.64.172.81) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:38:48 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 01 Aug 2011 12:38:12 -0600 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 08:32:51PM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 20:27, Jon Forrest wrote: > > I entirely agree. My point is only that the various tests > > that expect the current behavior will have to be changed > > whether the implementation of correct plurals uses my > > inferior method or the way more correct i18n method. > > Wouldn't it be a nice hack if we just solved problem through i18n > then? Have all the plumbing see the current wording, but through i18n > change it to something grammatically correct for the porcelain. > Probably not possible, but a nice daydream :). I thought there was still some question of whether this text was something that should be script-parseable. If it is, then it shouldn't be i18n'd at all, nor should we lightly change the format with pluralization magic. And if it isn't, then we should definitely go the full i18n route. So in either case, the original patch isn't appropriate. I don't have a strong opinion myself. I tend to lean towards i18n-ing it, because any scripts should be using --numstat to parse, anyway. OTOH, as Junio pointed out, we are matching the output of much older tools, so pre-git scripts might be written to read the --stat format. I've never seen such a script, and I have no idea how many there really are. -Peff