From: Patrick Lehner <lehner.patrick@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 21:07:21 GMT
Subject: Re: `git mv` has ambiguous error message for non-existing target
Message-ID: <50AA9F89.1050401@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <7vpq3cja4y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sa 17 Nov 2012 20:35:09 CET, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Patrick Lehner <lehner.patrick@gmx.de> writes:
>
>> But just because mv's error essage isnt very good, does that mean git
>> mv's error message mustn't be better?
>
> Did I say the error message from 'mv' was not very good in the
> message you are responding to (by the way, this is why you should
> never top-post when you are responding to a message on this list)?
>
> I meant to say that the message from 'mv' is good enough, so is the
> one given by 'git mv'.
>
> I wouldn't reject a patch that updates our message to something more
> informative without looking at it, though.

I apologize for top-posting -- I don't usually use mailing lists and am 
not aware of the usual netiquette.

And yes, I did interpret a bit more into your reply than was there.

I wouldn't call the 'mv' error message "good enough" in this case, but 
very well, opinions may very well differ. Unfortunately, I have no time 
to get into the git code and contribution guidelines, so I cannot 
submit a patch myself. I would appreciate if someone else who shares my 
sentiment and knows their way around the git source a bit could find 
the time to add this :)

Regards,
Patrick