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
