Re: [PATCH] "not uptodate" changed to "has local changes"

["Sverre Rabbelier" <alturin@gmail.com>]

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:31 PM, しらいしななこ <nanako3@bluebottle.com> wrote:
> What advantage are you bringing to the table for them to be worth bothering to update, other than "if they update then they can get their scripts working again after you break them by rewording messages for no good reason"? Why do you punish the old-timers for using the well established API?

My reason was that (perhaps not as much in this case, but I meant to
speak in general) the message is confusing/not clear enough.

> Did you study Junio's patch before you responded to his message? The point of the suggestion was that he reworded the message given by git-checkout that is a porcelain command without breaking output from read-tree that is a plumbing command. In other words, you can improve output from porcelain commands without making unnecessary changes to plumbing.

I hadn't read his e-mail when I was replying, my Internet has been
playing up lately (same for about half of the Netherlands due to a
problem at one of our biggest ISPs). I did reply to it though:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/81100

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier