From: konglu@minatec.inpg.fr Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 10:32:19 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 1/4] wt-status.*: better advices for git status added Message-ID: <20120605123219.Horde.4685bnwdC4BPzeAz2LLCYAA@webmail.minatec.grenoble-inp.fr> In-Reply-To: <7vtxyqr89y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Junio C Hamano a écrit : >> @@ -728,6 +729,167 @@ static void wt_status_print_tracking(struct >> wt_status *s) >> ... >> +static void show_am_in_progress(struct wt_status *s, >> + struct wt_status_state *state, >> + const char *color) >> +{ >> + status_printf_ln(s, color, >> + _("You are in the middle of an am session.")); >> + if (state->am_empty_patch) >> + status_printf_ln(s, color, >> + _("The current patch is empty.")); >> + if (advice_status_hints) { >> + status_printf_ln(s, color, >> + _(" (use \"git am --abort\" to restore the original branch)")); >> + status_printf_ln(s, color, >> + _(" (use \"git am --skip\" to skip this patch)")); >> + if (!state->am_empty_patch) >> + status_printf_ln(s, color, >> + _(" (when you have fixed this problem run \"git am --resolved\")")); >> + } >> + wt_status_print_trailer(s); >> +} > > Perhaps s/fixed this problem/resolved conflicts/ or a similar > rephrasing is a good idea. > > Conflicts from mergy operations are perfectly normal parts of a > regular workday, and it is not a "problem" that needs to be "fixed". > Both words scare the user by implying something is broken (or worse, > "git broke something") in the contents of user's repository. > > There are existing messages that use the verb "fix" on "conflicts", > only because it is shorter than "resolve", but this one that calls a > conflict a "problem" goes too far in the wrong direction. I agree. Still, experienced users probably have their advice.statushints disabled and won't have any problems resolving a conflict. However, for "beginners" that need the advices, resolving a conflict may not seem as trivial as it is. And even though the word "problem" may scare them, it will attract their attention.