On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 10:54:47AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jean-Noël Avila <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Noël Avila <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > builtin/checkout.c | 2 +-
> > builtin/fetch.c | 15 +++++++++++----
> > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> Thanks. Folks, does this look sensible (it does to me)?
Yes, modulo a funny indent in the final hunk (git-am will complain about
it).
I think we can take this as-is, but I did notice one thing when I
actually looked carefully at the surrounding code...
> > if (advice_fetch_show_forced_updates) {
> > if (!fetch_show_forced_updates) {
> > - warning(_("Fetch normally indicates which branches had
> > a forced update, but that check has been disabled."));
> > - warning(_("To re-enable, use '--show-forced-updates'
> > flag or run 'git config fetch.showForcedUpdates true'."));
> > + warning(_(warn_show_forced_updates));
This is controlled by advice.fetchShowForcedUpdates. Should these
warning() calls actually be advise()? In which case everything I said
about newlines and prefixes would then just work out, because advise()
does prefix each line independently. I'm happy to punt on that until
post-release, though, in the name of calming things down rather than
stirring them up. :)
-Peff
