Re: [PATCH v3] commit-template: change a message to be more intuitive

[Kaartic Sivaraam]

On Fri, 2017-09-15 at 12:00 +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Kaartic Sivaraam venit, vidit, dixit 15.09.2017 06:50:
> > 
> >  I didn't expect the least that this would go upto v3. In case anyboy finds

That's should have been 'anybody'.

> >  something wrong with this change too, it's a lot better to drop this 
> > altogether
> >  than going for a v4.
> 
> That happens more often than not :)
> 

:)

> Your original intent was to avoid any misunderstandings, and all the
> comments and iterations made sure that we don't trade one possible
> source of misunderstanding for another but avoid them all.
> 

Of course they did. 

> I consider v4 to be a strict improvement over the status quo and (as fas
> as I can see) to serve your original intent as good as possible.

I thought I shouldn't go for a v4 as I feared it might make things
worse than better because the original sentence wasn't that confusing
in the first place ;-)

-- 
Kaartic

Re: [PATCH v3] commit-template: change a message to be more intuitive

[Michael J Gruber]

Kaartic Sivaraam venit, vidit, dixit 15.09.2017 06:50:
> It's not good to use the phrase 'do not touch' to convey the information
> that the cut-line should not be modified or removed as it could possibly
> be mis-interpreted by a person who doesn't know that the word 'touch' has
> the meaning of 'tamper with'. Further, it could make translations a little
> difficult as it might not have the intended meaning in a few languages (for
> which translations don't exist yet) when translated as such.
> 
> So, use intuitive terms in the sentence. Replacing the word 'touch' with
> other terms has introduced the possibility of the following sentence to be
> mis-interpreted, so change the terms in that too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam 
> ---
>  Changes in v3:
>  
> - changed the wordings of the second sentence as there seemed to be a
>   magical 'or else' connecting the two lines.
>  
>  I didn't expect the least that this would go upto v3. In case anyboy finds
>  something wrong with this change too, it's a lot better to drop this 
> altogether
>  than going for a v4.

That happens more often than not :)

Your original intent was to avoid any misunderstandings, and all the
comments and iterations made sure that we don't trade one possible
source of misunderstanding for another but avoid them all.

I consider v4 to be a strict improvement over the status quo and (as fas
as I can see) to serve your original intent as good as possible.

>  wt-status.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
> index 77c27c511..23e87e74d 100644
> --- a/wt-status.c
> +++ b/wt-status.c
> @@ -934,7 +934,7 @@ size_t wt_status_locate_end(const char *s, size_t len)
>  
>  void wt_status_add_cut_line(FILE *fp)
>  {
> - const char *explanation = _("Do not touch the line above.\nEverything 
> below will be removed.");
> + const char *explanation = _("Do not modify or remove the line 
> above.\nEverything below it will be ignored.");
>   struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
>  
>   fprintf(fp, "%c %s", comment_line_char, cut_line);
> 

[PATCH v3] commit-template: change a message to be more intuitive

[Kaartic Sivaraam]

It's not good to use the phrase 'do not touch' to convey the information
that the cut-line should not be modified or removed as it could possibly
be mis-interpreted by a person who doesn't know that the word 'touch' has
the meaning of 'tamper with'. Further, it could make translations a little
difficult as it might not have the intended meaning in a few languages (for
which translations don't exist yet) when translated as such.

So, use intuitive terms in the sentence. Replacing the word 'touch' with
other terms has introduced the possibility of the following sentence to be
mis-interpreted, so change the terms in that too.

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam 
---
 Changes in v3:
 
- changed the wordings of the second sentence as there seemed to be a
  magical 'or else' connecting the two lines.
 
 I didn't expect the least that this would go upto v3. In case anyboy finds
 something wrong with this change too, it's a lot better to drop this altogether
 than going for a v4.

 wt-status.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
index 77c27c511..23e87e74d 100644
--- a/wt-status.c
+++ b/wt-status.c
@@ -934,7 +934,7 @@ size_t wt_status_locate_end(const char *s, size_t len)
 
 void wt_status_add_cut_line(FILE *fp)
 {
-   const char *explanation = _("Do not touch the line above.\nEverything 
below will be removed.");
+   const char *explanation = _("Do not modify or remove the line 
above.\nEverything below it will be ignored.");
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
 
fprintf(fp, "%c %s", comment_line_char, cut_line);
-- 
2.14.1.1006.g90ad9a07c