Hey Martin,

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Martin Ågren <martin.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 October 2017 at 17:06, Pranit Bauva <pranit.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +               /*
>> +                * have bad (or new) but not good (or old). We could bisect
>> +                * although this is less optimum.
>> +                */
>> +               fprintf(stderr, _("Warning: bisecting only with a %s 
>> commit\n"),
>> +                       terms->term_bad);
>
> Maybe this should use `warning()`?

Yeah. That would be better.

>> -               # have bad (or new) but not good (or old).  we could bisect 
>> although
>> -               # this is less optimum.
>> -               eval_gettextln "Warning: bisecting only with a \$TERM_BAD 
>> commit." >&2
>
> I wonder if we can somehow pick up the existing translation? It would
> now be fuzzy, in some sense, but since the string was originally in a
> different file, maybe the po-tools won't be able to discover the
> fuzzyness? We could add a TRANSLATORS-comment, so that the translators
> know that this string matches an old one. There are more strings like
> that in this patch, and maybe in some others as well, I haven't looked.
>
> (Adding Jiang to cc.)

Since I am re-rolling my previous series as well, I can make the
change in all patches.

Regards,
Pranit Bauva

Reply via email to