Re: [RFC 1/3] wt-status: Make conflict hint message more consistent with other hints

From: Andrew Wong <andrew.kw.w@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 26, 2014, 23:07 UTC
Message-ID: <CADgNjan+2kS-L4KwS4-wBMHcuQdW4cuHTNj4TA3yqExtr=dCUQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqmwhd391s.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> I see that you are trying to match the phrasing used in the other
> side of this if/else (which is outside the context of the posted
> patch).  Over there we say "... to conclude merge" while the new
> text says "... to conclude THE merge".  Don't we want to match them?

Ah, good catch. My mind just read it as "conclude THE merge", even though the word wasn't there. Let's add the "the" in. :)

Show 8 quoted lines

> For those who did not look beyond the context of the patch text, as
> I had to look these up to convince myself that the proposed change
> is a good one.  This function is only called when we see MERGE_HEAD,
> so "unmerged" here can come only from a failed merge, not other
> mergy operations like am, cherry-pick, revert, etc. and telling the
> user that 'commit' will conclude the merge will not be misleading
> (unless you count "'git commit' will conclude a conflicted 'git pull'"
> as misleading, and I of course do not).

I'll update the commit message to explain that I'm match the other side of the if/else.