>> Harald Nordgren (2):
>>   refactor format_branch_comparison in preparation
>>   status: show comparison with push remote tracking branch
>>
>>  remote.c                 | 183 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>  t/t6040-tracking-info.sh | 262 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  2 files changed, 403 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>> base-commit: d529f3a197364881746f558e5652f0236131eb86
>> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-2138%2FHaraldNordgren%2Fahead_of_main_status-v20
>> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-2138/HaraldNordgren/ahead_of_main_status-v20
>> Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/2138
>>
>> Range-diff vs v19:
>>
>>  1:  451d7a4986 ! 1:  bb3e00863b refactor format_branch_comparison in preparation
>>      @@ remote.c: int format_tracking_info(struct branch *branch, struct strbuf *sb,
>>        		if (advice_enabled(ADVICE_STATUS_HINTS))
>>        			strbuf_addstr(sb,
>>        				_("  (use \"git pull\" to update your local branch)\n"));
>>      -@@ remote.c: int format_tracking_info(struct branch *branch, struct strbuf *sb,
>>      - 			       "and have %d and %d different commits each, "
>>      - 			       "respectively.\n",
>>      - 			   ours + theirs),
>>      + 	} else {
>>      + 		strbuf_addf(sb,
>>      +-			Q_("Your branch and '%s' have diverged,\n"
>>      +-			       "and have %d and %d different commit each, "
>>      +-			       "respectively.\n",
>>      +-			   "Your branch and '%s' have diverged,\n"
>>      +-			       "and have %d and %d different commits each, "
>>      +-			       "respectively.\n",
>>      +-			   ours + theirs),
>>       -			base, ours, theirs);
>>      ++			"Your branch and '%s' have diverged,\n"
>>      ++			       "and have %d and %d different commits each, respectively.\n",
>>       +			branch_name, ours, theirs);
>>        		if (show_divergence_advice &&
>>        		    advice_enabled(ADVICE_STATUS_HINTS))
>
> Could you not mix the ours+theirs thing into the same step?  Either
> make it a standalone patch to clean up before or after your main 2
> patches, or leave it totally outside the series and send it after
> this series settles.

> Signed-off-by: Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com>
> ---
>     format_branch_comparison: diverged message has only plural case
>
> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-2239%2FHaraldNordgren%2Fformat_branch_comparison__plural-v1
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-2239/HaraldNordgren/format_branch_comparison__plural-v1
> Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/2239
>
>  remote.c | 9 ++-------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
> index 7ca2a6501b..12136dfa23 100644
> --- a/remote.c
> +++ b/remote.c
> @@ -2307,13 +2307,8 @@ static void format_branch_comparison(struct strbuf *sb,
>  				_("  (use \"git pull\" to update your local branch)\n"));
>  	} else {
>  		strbuf_addf(sb,
> -			Q_("Your branch and '%s' have diverged,\n"
> -			       "and have %d and %d different commit each, "
> -			       "respectively.\n",
> -			   "Your branch and '%s' have diverged,\n"
> -			       "and have %d and %d different commits each, "
> -			       "respectively.\n",
> -			   ours + theirs),
> +			_("Your branch and '%s' have diverged,\n"
> +			       "and have %d and %d different commits each, respectively.\n"),
>  			branch_name, ours, theirs);
>  		if (use_divergence_advice && advice_enabled(ADVICE_STATUS_HINTS))
>  			strbuf_addstr(sb,
>
> base-commit: dc6ecd5354dca88d51b6d6562777fc8fc10d77e1

> "Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> From: Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com>
>>
>> Drop Q_() singular form and use _() with the plural string only.
>
> I know the commit title talks about plural-only, but please make
> sure that the body of the log message carries all the necessary
> information to justify the change standalone.  "In the else clause,
> both ours and theirs are positive integers so ours+theirs must be at
> least 2, hence there is no need to prepare singular and plural
> variants of the message", or something to that effect, perhaps.
>
> The patch text and the reasoning behind it does sound familiar and I
> vaguely recall discussing about it ;-)
>
> Thanks.

> 
>      remote: don't use Q_() when it is not needed
> 
>      In this code path, both ours and theirs are already known to be
>      positive integers, so ours + theirs will always be plural, never
>      using the first variant given to Q_().
> 
>      Just use _() with the plural string only.

> There can be more than one form of the plural string though. The gettext 
> manual has the following example of the Polish translation of "file" for 
> different numbers of files [1]
>
> 	1 plik
> 	2,3,4 pliki
> 	5-21 plików
> 	22-24 pliki
> 	25-31 plików
>
> ngettext() handles that correctly, translating a single string without 
> an associated count will not.

> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> There can be more than one form of the plural string though. The gettext
>> manual has the following example of the Polish translation of "file" for
>> different numbers of files [1]
>>
>> 	1 plik
>> 	2,3,4 pliki
>> 	5-21 plików
>> 	22-24 pliki
>> 	25-31 plików
>>
>> ngettext() handles that correctly, translating a single string without
>> an associated count will not.
> 
> That is a very interesting example, and a valid reason to have me
> retract the #leftoverbits that led to the patch being discussed.
> 
> But wouldn't that lead to an awkward conclusion, i.e., hits from
> "git grep '[^Q]_("[^"]*%[id]' \*.c" are potential bugs that need to
> be updated to use ngettext().

> Of course, we need to exclude messages like "the error code %d was
> returned" and "you have a bug on line %d", but there seem to be real
> errors in randomly selected hits from the "git grep" output, e.g.,
> 
> add-patch.c:						 _("Split into %d hunks."),
> archive-zip.c:		return error(_("path too long (%d chars, SHA1: %s): %s"),
> builtin/checkout.c:	    die(_("'%s' matched multiple (%d) remote tracking branches"),
> builtin/credential-store.c:		die_errno(_("unable to get credential storage lock in %d ms"), timeout_ms);
> builtin/describe.c:				_("found %i tags; gave up search at %s\n"),
> builtin/fsck.c:		fprintf_ln(stderr, _("Checking connectivity (%d objects)"), max);
> 
> You can notice that I started from 'a' and stopped very early in 'b'
> ;-).
> 
> Thanks.

> On 15/03/2026 02:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> There can be more than one form of the plural string though. The gettext
>>> manual has the following example of the Polish translation of "file" for
>>> different numbers of files [1]
>>>
>>> 	1 plik
>>> 	2,3,4 pliki
>>> 	5-21 plików
>>> 	22-24 pliki
>>> 	25-31 plików
>>>
>>> ngettext() handles that correctly, translating a single string without
>>> an associated count will not.
>> 
>> That is a very interesting example, and a valid reason to have me
>> retract the #leftoverbits that led to the patch being discussed.
>> 
>> But wouldn't that lead to an awkward conclusion, i.e., hits from
>> "git grep '[^Q]_("[^"]*%[id]' \*.c" are potential bugs that need to
>> be updated to use ngettext().
>
> I think it does - maybe we should suggest fixing these as a miroproject 
> for GSoC and Outreachy? It certainly looks like there are plenty of them.

>
> Thanks
>
> Phillip
>
>> Of course, we need to exclude messages like "the error code %d was
>> returned" and "you have a bug on line %d", but there seem to be real
>> errors in randomly selected hits from the "git grep" output, e.g.,
>> 
>> add-patch.c:						 _("Split into %d hunks."),
>> archive-zip.c:		return error(_("path too long (%d chars, SHA1: %s): %s"),
>> builtin/checkout.c:	    die(_("'%s' matched multiple (%d) remote tracking branches"),
>> builtin/credential-store.c:		die_errno(_("unable to get credential storage lock in %d ms"), timeout_ms);
>> builtin/describe.c:				_("found %i tags; gave up search at %s\n"),
>> builtin/fsck.c:		fprintf_ln(stderr, _("Checking connectivity (%d objects)"), max);
>> 
>> You can notice that I started from 'a' and stopped very early in 'b'
>> ;-).
>> 
>> Thanks.

>
> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> But wouldn't that lead to an awkward conclusion, i.e., hits from
> >> "git grep '[^Q]_("[^"]*%[id]' \*.c" are potential bugs that need to
> >> be updated to use ngettext().
> >
> > I think it does - maybe we should suggest fixing these as a miroproject
> > for GSoC and Outreachy? It certainly looks like there are plenty of them.
>
> That would be great.  It needs a bit of thinking, the required
> change for each of them is quite small, and there are tons of them.
> An ideal candidate for a microproject.
>
> Adding it to the list of microproject ideas is a good #leftoverbits
> as well.
>