From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C5DC433F5 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:03:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234467AbhLUXDS (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:03:18 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51650 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231946AbhLUXDR (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:03:17 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48DF5C061574 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:03:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id m21so2378337edc.0 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:03:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MR0qlHuV+TcvmGskfT2exZzdQyXlnbAgffwMHLoQoHQ=; b=drlmpLQkfU7c0R+SKCccRaY0WBFkPiKctPU2gvjCFDVtUYOfU0DpiQbL/QClqCLAxi X9PPM8GyTW9FpUOadAFHNOH+r4MOMecgZOqTciHk6OHK1CR+NhOG8yef/Ma0UhYvO3GM 2njfnloTDMd/zLXR0wfIQfOyKUuiZjq/s1c2PUJw1wUwSHOgaMuIB8V3l028foN0XC/T O4MiH/1w5X0/PpI1MdVmgDvjcqbJvp0Ew4bpi69B1Kp8qtUmtcZ3RZcnvPCoZo2F9Wh7 I/FSgSbt03dwK7q0qeYiBVGxYlpX6S3caR48izd/pMpaWqphtYm/37h5G1drhVaUDrHp 7Nmg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MR0qlHuV+TcvmGskfT2exZzdQyXlnbAgffwMHLoQoHQ=; b=A9lG9V5aMjkDtqD7NrmeHprqrqN4ROz6Rgfo9UnmY84iSbuYhPvop4V2tgIgIxvagF Opu73hFUzN9m1z8nxe+9QPtfsusF5D0LFrsjkSWwrrexS1EvFVeJ7/cbbOFOLND+j4e9 H4RUrlXM4j5VvDr7oDpk51M4OHLNefobS2AVyNuK17pr02aXnLQI+EkMrK+r1A1hq1Sa gSxuTxgaCrqqKT8sCfBlbjlJp0+HmEP0LX/iHS7oB7//4gY0u76hMvc0aTgIE0qRBXRc LFtsXU3XlaKw9KmO5p+JLaouaPYZAqRWe9GMZd1mr5DO5e56uHYtqSyNep6Hvw7Swzm9 LQCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JhwugxYiqu4/VtXvhtkELwAdOT8WiAHwA1tCM9P2d0b2MHpD2 YldpBICBUdS6Nu2HBXBP0asqAkMda1M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzqO8tme7/5HmwJultVzvTly45AcwUkfkQ3gm49R0wNX0CinnOPQfY3Wp8CofdfHNKAcoA0Sw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:274e:: with SMTP id z14mr388690edd.369.1640127795613; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:03:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmgdl (j120189.upc-j.chello.nl. [24.132.120.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ga12sm75926ejc.11.2021.12.21.15.03.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:03:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from avar by gmgdl with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1mzoA6-000zQU-PJ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 00:03:14 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Elijah Newren Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget , Git Mailing List , Jeff King , Jonathan Nieder , Sergey Organov , Bagas Sanjaya , Neeraj Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ll-merge: make callers responsible for showing warnings Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 00:02:54 +0100 References: <211221.868rwdr6wc.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.6.10 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <211222.86v8zhpnm5.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 21 2021, Elijah Newren wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 1:21 PM =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Dec 21 2021, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget wrote: >> >> > From: Elijah Newren >> >> > + if (status =3D=3D LL_MERGE_BINARY_CONFLICT) >> > + warning("Cannot merge binary files: %s (%s vs. %s)", >> > + "base", "ours", "theirs"); >> >> This & other messages in the series have warning/BUG etc. starting with >> upper-case. > > Yes, but I'm not introducing a new message here; I'm merely moving an > existing one. It's important to me that readers of this patch be able > to verify that I have made no functional changes in this patch, so > fixing the case should definitely be a different patch from this one. > I kind of think that fixing the case distracts a bit from the point of > the series, and the series is already kind of long, but do you feel > strongly that I should fix the case with a new patch inserted into the > series? I just missed the bit where it was moved from below in the diff. Sorry about the noise.