On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 19:06 +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote:
> The error messages shown when the branch command is misused
> by supplying it wrong number of parameters wasn't meaningful.
> That's because it used the the phrase "too many branches"
> assuming all parameters to be "valid" branch names. It's not
> always the case as exemplified below,
> 
>         $ git branch
>           foo
>         * master
> 
>         $ git branch -m foo foo old
>         fatal: too many branches for a rename operation
> 
> Change the messages to be more general thus making no assumptions
> about the "parameters".
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91...@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Changes in v2:
> 
>     - changed the wordings of the error message
> 
>  builtin/branch.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c
> index a3bd2262b..62981d358 100644
> --- a/builtin/branch.c
> +++ b/builtin/branch.c
> @@ -707,12 +707,12 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char 
> *prefix)
>               else if (argc == 2)
>                       rename_branch(argv[0], argv[1], rename > 1);
>               else
> -                     die(_("too many branches for a rename operation"));
> +                     die(_("too many arguments for a rename operation"));
>       } else if (new_upstream) {
>               struct branch *branch = branch_get(argv[0]);
>  
>               if (argc > 1)
> -                     die(_("too many branches to set new upstream"));
> +                     die(_("too many arguments to set new upstream"));
>  
>               if (!branch) {
>                       if (!argc || !strcmp(argv[0], "HEAD"))
> @@ -735,7 +735,7 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char 
> *prefix)
>               struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
>  
>               if (argc > 1)
> -                     die(_("too many branches to unset upstream"));
> +                     die(_("too many arguments to unset upstream"));
>  
>               if (!branch) {
>                       if (!argc || !strcmp(argv[0], "HEAD"))


I was recently searching to find the patches have gone missing in to
the void for no obvious reason and found this. Should I consider this
to be "Dropped" in terms of the "What's cooking" emails? or has this
just not received the required attention?

---
Kaartic

Reply via email to