[PATCH] revert: use "discard"/"revert" verb when reverting interactively (issue5143)

[Denis Laxalde]

Augie Fackler a écrit :
>>> Fwiw localizers would typically object to this... It doesn't give
>>> them enough flexibility of wording two distinct messages.
>>
>> (Thanks for looking at this rephrasing, it was long overdue!)
>>
>> However, I agree with timeless that we need two full messages here
>> for i18n purpose. That said? why do we need two messages at all?
>> Could a single one work?
>
> I think three messages (“record/discard/revert”) is better than one
> by a wide margin. I’m not sure how I feel about two
> (“record/revert”), but it’s still clearly an improvement over 3.8.
> I’d be delighted to see a followup that’ll make i18n happy. :)
>

I'm also not really satisfied by the "revert" verb, but it at least 
matches with the command name and it's also better than "record" given 
that the user is asked to apply a "reversed" diff (see also 
https://bz.mercurial-scm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5096).

I'll be glad to update i18n once there's a consensus.

-- 
Denis Laxalde
Logilab         http://www.logilab.fr