[PATCH STABLE] record: update help message to use operation instead of "record" (issue5432)

[Boris Feld]

On 25/04/2017 23:15, Sean Farley wrote:
> Boris Feld <boris.feld at octobus.net> writes:
>
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Boris Feld <boris.feld at octobus.net>
>> # Date 1493046804 -7200
>> #      Mon Apr 24 17:13:24 2017 +0200
>> # Branch stable
>> # Node ID 208a60229f9bdf04351442c7a2fd66f41b83ea3e
>> # Parent  0ea1d9a750da142e67690d88644ce4121ed268a1
>> record: update help message to use operation instead of "record" (issue5432)
>>
>> Update the hunk selector help message to use the operation name instead
>> of using "record" for all operations. Extract the help message in the same way
>> as other single and multiple message line.
>> Update tests to make sure that both "revert" and "discard" variants are tested.
>>
>> diff -r 0ea1d9a750da -r 208a60229f9b mercurial/patch.py
>> --- a/mercurial/patch.py	Tue Apr 18 11:10:08 2017 -0700
>> +++ b/mercurial/patch.py	Mon Apr 24 17:13:24 2017 +0200
>> @@ -992,6 +992,38 @@
>>               'record': _("record this change to '%s'?"),
>>               'revert': _("revert this change to '%s'?"),
>>           }[operation],
>> +        'help': {
>> +            'discard': _('[Ynesfdaq?]'
>> +                      '$$ &Yes, discard this change'
>> +                      '$$ &No, skip this change'
>> +                      '$$ &Edit this change manually'
>> +                      '$$ &Skip remaining changes to this file'
>> +                      '$$ Discard remaining changes to this &file'
>> +                      '$$ &Done, skip remaining changes and files'
>> +                      '$$ Discard &all changes to all remaining files'
>> +                      '$$ &Quit, discarding no changes'
>> +                      '$$ &? (display help)'),
>> +            'record': _('[Ynesfdaq?]'
>> +                      '$$ &Yes, record this change'
>> +                      '$$ &No, skip this change'
>> +                      '$$ &Edit this change manually'
>> +                      '$$ &Skip remaining changes to this file'
>> +                      '$$ Record remaining changes to this &file'
>> +                      '$$ &Done, skip remaining changes and files'
>> +                      '$$ Record &all changes to all remaining files'
>> +                      '$$ &Quit, recording no changes'
>> +                      '$$ &? (display help)'),
>> +            'revert': _('[Ynesfdaq?]'
>> +                      '$$ &Yes, revert this change'
>> +                      '$$ &No, skip this change'
>> +                      '$$ &Edit this change manually'
>> +                      '$$ &Skip remaining changes to this file'
>> +                      '$$ Revert remaining changes to this &file'
>> +                      '$$ &Done, skip remaining changes and files'
>> +                      '$$ Revert &all changes to all remaining files'
>> +                      '$$ &Quit, reverting no changes'
>> +                      '$$ &? (display help)')
> Perhaps as a follow-up (after the freeze) these could be consolidated
> since they all follow the same pattern? Not a big deal, though.
I also think they can be consolidated in a better way, but I don't know 
which way yet. I'm not fully aware how mercurial i18n works, but I would 
be inclined to put them at the module level or perhaps in a separate 
module to defined them once, what do you think?