From: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:27:37 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pull: add angle brackets to usage string
Message-ID: <CAMMLpeTf93NnqPM+SaxfhsSdMg1HUiVyo5FFdiuGF9o-KQbGog@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq4mhqg15y.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

2015-10-16 11:42 GMT-06:00 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
> Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 2015-10-16 10:36 GMT-06:00 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
>>> Makes sense, as all the other <placeholders> in the usage string are
>>> bracketted.
>>>
>>> Does it make sense to do this for contrib/examples, which is the
>>> historical record, though?
>>
>> I didn't know that contrib/examples was a historical record. The last
>> patch I submitted, b7447679e84ed973430ab19fce87f56857b83068, also
>> modified contrib/examples.
>
> Yes, but that fixes historical "mistake", no?
>
> With this, you are breaking historical practice by changing only one
> instance to deviate from the then-current practice of saying
> 'options' without brackets.  It is based on the point of view that
> considers anything inside <bracket> and a fixed string 'options' are
> meant to be replaced by intelligent readers, which is as valid as
> the more recent practice to consider only things inside <bracket>
> are placeholders.

OK, I see. You're saying that it's OK to fix typos and grammatical
errors in contrib/examples, but it's not okay to modernize the
scripts' designs. That's fine; standardizing placeholder syntax is
primarily for the benefit of translators, and contrib/ is not
translated, so it's not causing a problem.

-Alex