[PATCH] wireproto: rephase the error message for unknown getbundle parameters

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 06/07/2014 06:40 AM, Augie Fackler wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:48:45PM -0700, pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org wrote:
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at fb.com>
>> # Date 1401227131 25200
>> #      Tue May 27 14:45:31 2014 -0700
>> # Node ID 044630b9aa690782ee08f523b4b8735d99f05d57
>> # Parent  25732fab4dc35a76cfb8f659fde48c7e0dc42dbf
>> wireproto: rephase the error message for unknown getbundle parameters
>>
>> In case of an unknown parameter passed to ``getbundle``, the server prints a
>> message and ignores the parameter. This message was misleadingly prefixed with
>> "abort: ". The use of "abort: " here is clearly wrong as nothing is actually
>> aborted and the ``getbundle`` call proceeds without the parameter.
>>
>> The message is now prefixed with "warning: " and rephrased to make it clearer
>> that the parameter was simply ignored.
>>
>> diff --git a/mercurial/wireproto.py b/mercurial/wireproto.py
>> --- a/mercurial/wireproto.py
>> +++ b/mercurial/wireproto.py
>> @@ -505,11 +505,11 @@ def options(cmd, keys, others):
>>       for k in keys:
>>           if k in others:
>>               opts[k] = others[k]
>>               del others[k]
>>       if others:
>> -        sys.stderr.write("abort: %s got unexpected arguments %s\n"
>> +        sys.stderr.write("warning: %s ignores unexpected arguments %s\n"
>>                            % (cmd, ",".join(others)))
>
> Now for the point where I'm going to argue about tenses briefly. Right
> now this is stating that "method foo ignores arguments", but I think
> you mean that arguments were already ignored, so should this be "%s
> ignored" instead of "%s ignores"?
>
> (The way you have it /might/ be intentional, thus my hesitance to just
> queue this with a fix.)

"ignored" seems better.

-- 
Pierre-Yves David