[PATCH] merge: report all files in _checkunknown

[Matt Mackall]

On Sun, 2012-01-15 at 13:45 -0500, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> 2012/1/14 Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com>:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 13:53 -0500, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> >> # HG changeset patch
> >> # User Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh at octave.org>
> >> # Date 1326315222 18000
> >> # Node ID 46d716242ad454d7959554aa4cee1f13cacd6d84
> >> # Parent  c47d69ce5208d5b5cfd2fb2f0f1d7a2b4795fbf5
> >> merge: report all files in _checkunknown
> >
> > a) you've gratuitously changed the wording -> you've invited an
> > avoidable bikeshedding excursion and/or rejection
> >
> > -            raise util.Abort(_("untracked file in working directory differs"
> > -                               " from file in requested revision: '%s'") % fn)
> > +            error = True
> > +            repo.ui.warn(_("%s: untracked file differs\n") % fn)
> > +    if error:
> > +        raise util.Abort(_("untracked files in working directory conflict "
> > +                           "with files in requested revision"))
> >
> > Why are we saying "conflicts" when we used to say "differs"?
> 
> I tried asking you in IRC first. I guess you didn't notice the
> different wording there.
> 
> I didn't know what message to put when reporting each untracked file
> that differed. After I wrote that message, I wrote "conflicts" in the
> final message in order to give more information (the differing files
> are a conflict).

Indeed, but they're a different type of conflict than what we normally
call a conflict because we have no way to resolve them. So you're ADDING
ambiguity by changing the word choice.

> What wording would you suggest instead?

This is my point: don't change it! The version I now have queued looks
like this:

-  abort: untracked file in working directory differs from file in requested revision: 'a'
+  a: untracked file differs
+  abort: untracked files in working directory differ from files in requested revision

All I've done is adjust for plurals. Since this is obviously no worse
than what was already there, the patch can go in without digressing into
a discussion about word choice.

If you want to improve this message, that's orthogonal to getting
multiple filenames out and we can discuss it separately.

> > b) you didn't update the tests
> 
> What tests? Sorry.

The thing about testing is that you can't always know which tests you
might break without running the whole suite. This one tripped up
test-merge1.t and test-casefolding.t.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.