On 2012-03-16 21:17 +0100, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Guillem Jover wrote:
>>> On 2012-03-16 15:07 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
>
>>>> + if (opt_verbose > 0)
>>>> + printf(_("Ignoring removal of shared diversion
>>>> '%s'.\n"),
>>>> + diversion_describe(contest));
> [...]
>> Would the following clarify?
>>
>> "Ignoring removal request of shared diversion '%s'.\n"
>
> Yes, I think so. Micronit: it would sound more natural with s/of/for/.
How about "Ignoring request to remove shared diversion '%s'.\n" ?
Cheers,
Sven
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
