From: "Ralf Thielow" <ralf.thie...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:55 PM
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:33:09AM +0100, Thomas Rast wrote:
Ralf Thielow <ralf.thie...@gmail.com> writes:
> #: builtin/reset.c:275
> -#, fuzzy, c-format
> +#, c-format
> msgid "Failed to resolve '%s' as a valid revision."
> -msgstr "Konnte '%s' nicht als gültige Referenz auflösen."
> +msgstr "Konnte '%s' nicht als gültige Revision auflösen."
You don't have "revision" in the glossary[1] yet. Wouldn't it be
appropriate to treat it as "commit", and translate as "Version" to
avoid
introducing yet another term?
Or am I missing some subtle distinction between commit and revision?
I don't think there's a distinction.
It was a problem I had http://stackoverflow.com/a/11792712/717355
answered as:
See "SPECIFYING REVISIONS" of git rev-parse:
A revision parameter <rev> typically, but not necessarily, names a
commit object.
It uses what is called an extended SHA1 syntax, [and includes] various
ways to spell object names.
It had me confused for a while.
Since we've already translated
"revision" as "Revision" in a couple of other messages, I'll make a
new "s/Revision/Version" commit on top.
Since it's only a single nit, feel free to add my ack when you
reroll:
Acked-by: Thomas Rast <tr...@inf.ethz.ch>
[1] https://github.com/ralfth/git-po-de/wiki/Glossary
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
Philip Oakley
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
