On 10/13/2016 5:26 PM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > sion re-adds the result pool to > `svn_client_conflict_option_get_lazel`.
> diff --git a/subversion/include/svn_client.h > b/subversion/include/svn_client.h > index 9bbe62b..f456c92 100644 > --- a/subversion/include/svn_client.h > +++ b/subversion/include/svn_client.h > @@ -4718,6 +4718,20 @@ svn_client_conflict_option_id_t > svn_client_conflict_option_get_id(svn_client_conflict_option_t *option); > > [...] > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_merged_text, > + _("Mark as resolved"), > _("accept binary file as it appears in the working copy"), > resolve_text_conflict); Not sure whether "Mark as resolved" means much to the user. Maybe "Accept/Use current version" would be easier to get? Or maybe "Accept/Use current" to keep the label consistent with the style of the others. > [...] > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_working_text, > + _("Reject incoming"), > _("reject all incoming changes for this file"), > resolve_text_conflict); IMO "Reject incoming" is the inversed way to describe what's being done. Better would be: "Accept current"? > > [...] > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_working_text_where_conflicted, > + _("Reject conflicts"), > _("reject changes which conflict and accept the rest"), > resolve_text_conflict); => "Accept incoming non-conflicting changes only."? > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_merged_text, > + _("Mark as resolved"), > _("accept the file as it appears in the working copy"), > resolve_text_conflict); Same as above: "Accept/Use current" > [...] > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_working_text, > + _("Mark as resolved"), > _("accept working copy version of entire property value"), > resolve_prop_conflict); Same as above. > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_incoming_text_where_conflicted, > - N_("accept changes only where they conflict"), > + _("Accept incoming for conflicts"), > + _("accept incoming changes only where they conflict"), > resolve_prop_conflict); The wording is a bit misleading IMO. It might be interpreted as non-conflicting incoming changes being rejected rather than these being merged implicitly (or am I wrong?). Maybe better wording would be: Label: Resolve conflicts with incoming changes Desc: Accept incoming and resolve conflicts using the incoming changes. > > add_resolution_option(*options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_working_text_where_conflicted, > + _("Reject conflicts"), > _("reject changes which conflict and accept the rest"), > resolve_prop_conflict); Reject conflicts doesn't quite reflect what's being done. Maybe: "Resolve conflicts with local changes." "Accept incoming and resolve conflicts using the local changes." > [...] > add_resolution_option(options, conflict, > > svn_client_conflict_option_accept_current_wc_state, > + _("Mark as resolved"), > _("accept current working copy state"), > do_resolve_func); See above. > > @@ -7264,6 +7285,7 @@ > configure_option_update_move_destination(svn_client_conflict_t *conflict, > add_resolution_option( > options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_update_move_destination, > + _("Update move destination"), > _("apply incoming changes to move destination"), > resolve_update_moved_away_node); > } The label doesn't quite reflect what's being done (aka: how it's updated). Maybe: "Apply changes to move destination" > @@ -7298,6 +7320,7 @@ configure_option_update_raise_moved_away_children( > add_resolution_option( > options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_update_any_moved_away_children, > + _("Update any moved-away children"), > _("prepare for updating moved-away children, if any"), > resolve_update_raise_moved_away); > } Same as above. > [...] > > return SVN_NO_ERROR; > @@ -7425,7 +7448,8 @@ > configure_option_incoming_added_file_text_merge(svn_client_conflict_t > *conflict, > add_resolution_option( > options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_incoming_added_file_text_merge, > - description, resolve_merge_incoming_added_file_text_merge); > + _("Merge the files"), description, > + resolve_merge_incoming_added_file_text_merge); > } Maybe better: Merge incoming file with local. > > return SVN_NO_ERROR; > @@ -7481,6 +7505,7 @@ > configure_option_incoming_added_file_replace_and_merge( > add_resolution_option( > options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_incoming_added_file_replace_and_merge, > + _("Replace and merge"), > description, > resolve_merge_incoming_added_file_replace_and_merge); > } TBH: I'm not sure what the behavior of this option is. It sounds like it's the same as the previous one to me... Where's the difference? > > @@ -7533,7 +7558,7 @@ > configure_option_incoming_added_dir_merge(svn_client_conflict_t *conflict, > scratch_pool)); > add_resolution_option(options, conflict, > > svn_client_conflict_option_incoming_added_dir_merge, > - description, > + _("Merge the directories"), description, > resolve_merge_incoming_added_dir_merge); > } > > [..] > > return SVN_NO_ERROR; > @@ -7644,8 +7669,8 @@ > configure_option_incoming_added_dir_replace_and_merge( > add_resolution_option( > options, conflict, > svn_client_conflict_option_incoming_added_dir_replace_and_merge, > - description, > - resolve_merge_incoming_added_dir_replace_and_merge); > + _("Replace and merge"), > + description, resolve_merge_incoming_added_dir_replace_and_merge); > } Same as before. Where is this different to svn_client_conflict_option_incoming_added_dir_merge? Great work btw. :-) Regards, Stefan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature