From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2026 23:09:57 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Add preparing state to reference-transaction hook
Message-ID: <xmqq7brf1g3e.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <abSWrcvm-smx92MY@denethor>

Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com> writes:

> On 26/03/13 03:35PM, eric.peijian@gmail.com wrote:
>> diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
>> index 6fb8f9d10c..f1439476d3 100644
>> --- a/refs.c
>> +++ b/refs.c
>> @@ -2655,6 +2655,13 @@ int ref_transaction_prepare(struct ref_transaction *transaction,
>>  	if (ref_update_reject_duplicates(&transaction->refnames, err))
>>  		return REF_TRANSACTION_ERROR_GENERIC;
>>  
>> +	/* Preparing checks before locking references */
>> +	ret = run_transaction_hook(transaction, "preparing");
>> +	if (ret) {
>> +		ref_transaction_abort(transaction, err);
>> +		die(_("ref updates aborted by %s hook"), "preparing");
>
> Should "preparing" be marked for translation here?

It literally is one of the possible tokens reference-transaction
hook is given as its argument, so no, I do not think "preparing"
should be translated.

But the hook that interrupted the ref update is not "preparing"
hook.  It is the "reference-transaction" hook.  So the message
probably should say something like

    the reference-transaction hook rejected ref updates at its
    preparing phase

or something.

>> +	}
>> +
>>  	ret = refs->be->transaction_prepare(refs, transaction, err);
>>  	if (ret)
>>  		return ret;
>> @@ -2662,7 +2669,7 @@ int ref_transaction_prepare(struct ref_transaction *transaction,
>>  	ret = run_transaction_hook(transaction, "prepared");
>>  	if (ret) {
>>  		ref_transaction_abort(transaction, err);
>> -		die(_("ref updates aborted by hook"));
>> +		die(_("ref updates aborted by %s hook"), "prepared");
>
> Same question here for "prepared"?

Ditto.