[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: local %s, incoming %s, etc. (Re: svn commit: r34329 - in branches/tc_url_rev/subversion: include libsvn_wc svn)

From: Neels J Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 02:50:22 +0100

Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote on Sun, 23 Nov 2008 at 16:13 -0000:
>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:16:24PM +0000, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 02:58:06AM +0100, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
>>>> I think it does. It tells people what they were trying to do, and what they
>>>> need to do to fix it. If we merge into an update-conflicted working copy,
>>>> and that merge creates more tree-conflicts... let's just leave it there.
>>> OK, let's leave it in, but can we change the output to this?
>>> + *desc = apr_psprintf(pool, _("local %s, incoming %s by %s"),
>>> + reason, action, operation);
>>> Anyway, we're making up the output based on gut-feeling, not human
>>> interface research guidelines. So there's not much point in arguing.
>>> Let's just try to find a form of output we're all more or less
>>> happy with.
> I think that it is hard (since there is a word on either side of it,
> with no visual delimiters) to quickly parse out the 'action' phrase
> (which is the interesting part (e.g., it is the only thing in the
> message that the user didn't know before the operation started)) from
> the *desc string.
> I'd prefer the previous formats (either "local %s, incoming %s" or the
> same with " (by %s)" appended) -- I found both of them easier to parse
> (maybe because they had more punctuation around the replaceable parts).
> Yellow.

LOL! I'm also +1 for yellow, but whatever.

Received on 2008-11-24 02:50:57 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.