On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:
> CC-ed to Jiang Xin, L10N coordinator.
> W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:05, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de>
> > ---
> > sequencer.c | 7 ++-----
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> > index cbdce6d..1b65202 100644
> > --- a/sequencer.c
> > +++ b/sequencer.c
> > @@ -232,11 +232,8 @@ static int error_dirty_index(struct replay_opts *opts)
> > if (read_cache_unmerged())
> > return error_resolve_conflict(action_name(opts));
> > - /* Different translation strings for cherry-pick and revert */
> > - if (opts->action == REPLAY_PICK)
> > - error(_("Your local changes would be overwritten by
> > cherry-pick."));
> > - else
> > - error(_("Your local changes would be overwritten by revert."));
> > + error(_("Your local changes would be overwritten by %s."),
> > + action_name(opts));
> If I understand it correctly, it would make "revert" or "cherry-pick"
> untranslated part of error message. You would need to use translation
> on the result with "_(action_name(opts))", you would have to mark
> todo_command_strings elements for gettext lexicon with N_(...).
> I am rather against this change (see also below).
Unfortunately, I have to focus on the correctness of the code at the
moment (and Git for Windows does ship *without* translations for the time
being anyway, mostly to save on space, but also because users complained).
So I will take care of this after v2.10.0.
For the record, how is this supposed to be handled, in particular when I
introduce a new action whose action_name(opts) will be "rebase -i"? Do I
really need to repeat myself three times?