From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 221AE13634A for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:10:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722618654; cv=none; b=tR7Frxb60/5lLQ+JxzYZuGwY0YyWoFWOkzs3lN/QfMjwVyF+RzCeEJvLTAqNJ2sdC0cKIy68CPO+L9k+TDsdCUcsg58JhwZ4+jQrpYffyJU55tc+neRDaFxMUsISNQq81oFOP9o6ffmvpy9mmQnQxnZ+b1n7r+lbGP0+JjoUF38= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722618654; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pUpHvfb4AIJ/r21QtMGUwZKCA/vznKJkcfURkZvxx+Q=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=U8P6c6yCY1oCwrfGYjTS18NrTy63Sb+9kpuSzZ5b9jdla7ZfR9a7o6NfE3/aZtn2CuMk7B8Ks/Vg8y978Hts7c+cJ6GArR65m9O1s+JIvGw1TT0U0uB0DVWMhkRk+YzqspY3saXuBYLQRFE8mpzvkHKz98czP9Gj77qpGzO2CsE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=kKgnAD9t; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="kKgnAD9t" Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D973027475; Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:10:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=pUpHvfb4AIJ/r21QtMGUwZKCA/vznKJkcfURkZ vxx+Q=; b=kKgnAD9tUH5ZK3BBWRXE4fB1LJ8yu/C3lxzvB5av+Nl6Bocp2RWcnr kbeBMATf1fG5Os1cRARYNQSFWgsRPr2n1fqMesse6BYkfdxjwPLEb8VpuiFRVsrV iDlK1ttqjsbFh7Uoq2xJG5vYGpZpSi3y37wjhurDBoBS5vFgvd5DE= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A1327474; Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:10:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.108.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3298927473; Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:10:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Ryan Hendrickson Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] http: do not ignore proxy path In-Reply-To: <2ba77de5-f103-c2f0-c009-71700c8a020d@alum.mit.edu> (Ryan Hendrickson's message of "Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:43:07 -0400 (EDT)") References: <2ba77de5-f103-c2f0-c009-71700c8a020d@alum.mit.edu> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2024 10:10:49 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 2B674B0C-50F2-11EF-9B09-BAC1940A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Ryan Hendrickson writes: > Hmm. I'd be inclined to take the preliminary clean-up approach, but > some of the existing strings (there are also two "Unsupported > ..."/"Supported ..." strings near the "Could not set..."s) are going > through gettext, and I'm reluctant to interfere with the l10n process. I do not see what you mean by interfering with the localization. If we are updating text to be translated anyway, giving translators the strings that need to be translated _earlier_ rather than later would be more helpful to them, no? >> If I were writing this, I would shorten to look for a bit fuzzier >> pattern like >> >> grep "^fatal: .* is required to support paths in proxy URLs" "$1" >> >> as that would allow us to fix the code later without needing to >> update the pattern, if we discover reasons, other than being older >> than libcURL 7.84, why paths in proxy URLs cannot be supported. > > Is this blocking feedback? This strikes me as speculative > over-engineering No, it is loosening a pattern that is overly tight and as a side effect shortening the line to more readable length ;-).