From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: `git mv` has ambiguous error message for non-existing target Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 11:35:09 -0800 Message-ID: <7vpq3cja4y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <50A53A80.4080203@gmx.de> <7vehju8h5j.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <50A5E6D2.5060609@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick Lehner X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Nov 17 20:35:35 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TZoAs-0005EC-M2 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:35:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752092Ab2KQTfO (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:35:14 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:50343 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752030Ab2KQTfM (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:35:12 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 138F0A2E5; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:35:12 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=YSviXdl6G1sFgvdaxzWhkY6+XHo=; b=DkVRrN a6reFHGJipNTrnFAAGJdv9ypInze0iqODlh6Xrb/m3NzmzlYIY0K6qUXiHdLcyyG QzqgQiC3MJXj+vy8P43Y6huwpEEXpoUSAFWjEDwKEy/Omi3bxenfVvaFT6/OZQEh KgGbKKntlCtNhlkcvRHXCvTCy/K75E0OJ1flI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=tyyzr0699yZDR1w/6lwPUmtxIq1c7NzT av+nPx9pfcsPGe9sR1ILoZ4B6NZpaXwARO8SYV9zCAHeJVDlx70YVE5bbgUdC7if ufSMrZ7C3NNuVcAsBSVmbxAY0cMYYJPaPyl7IXlh27MXLYGz4OdKS+deZxSbXBJg dGERozWZCSw= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F26A2E4; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:35:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71836A2E3; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:35:11 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <50A5E6D2.5060609@gmx.de> (Patrick Lehner's message of "Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:10:10 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E6F4E06E-30ED-11E2-8A4E-54832E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Patrick Lehner writes: > But just because mv's error essage isnt very good, does that mean git > mv's error message mustn't be better? Did I say the error message from 'mv' was not very good in the message you are responding to (by the way, this is why you should never top-post when you are responding to a message on this list)? I meant to say that the message from 'mv' is good enough, so is the one given by 'git mv'. I wouldn't reject a patch that updates our message to something more informative without looking at it, though.