[PATCH 2 of 2] pull: new output message suggests better update action when a new branch head is added
laurens.nospam at grauw.nl
Fri Mar 18 11:36:05 CDT 2011
Op 18-03-11 13:17, Greg Ward schreef:
> On 18 March 2011, Laurens Holst said:
>> Op 16-03-11 23:55, Kevin Bullock schreef:
>>> Here are my suggestions:
>>> 0: keep as is
>>> 1: "run 'hg heads .' to see heads, 'hg merge' to merge" (per Greg's suggestion)
>>> 2: "new heads added on OTHERBRANCH" or just "new heads added on another branch"
>> Remember to cover the case when there are new heads on several branches:
>> if updated_branches.length == 1
>> 'new heads added on OTHERBRANCH'
>> 'new heads added on other branches'
> Actually, Mercurial carefully buries its head in the sand over
> plurals. That leads to funny-looking messages like
It’s not about plurals, what I meant was that if you’re going to mention
a branch name in that string, you also need to consider what to show
when the heads were added on more than one branch.
> added 1 changesets with 1 changes to 1 files
> but it avoids logic like the above and avoids translation
> So to be consistent, I guess we should just say
> new heads added on other branches
> if>= 1 other branches were affected.
That is exactly what I meant :).
More information about the Mercurial-devel