From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_CSS, URIBL_CSS_A,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_SBL_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294C81F953 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 19:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1347759AbhLFTW2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2021 14:22:28 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:60260 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235258AbhLFTW2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2021 14:22:28 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD2D101ECD; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 14:18:58 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=r1DYCm7EIyS4 BT/v6dBM05zyU0hhFguinm5+d+hgjbc=; b=i4PbRRE7CG3owha/SYmOIPWSPU+h pRWNbm8i/+x7fEc+dPh/MsWkAeJIWXtUn35YXplb5btXPrkTOlftu5dvrDEmRlJ6 Xphw66g9XOqj26+1RRyrkxUmfWc3nXKw5KUfJS/7jCbQLCPNO3YI6HmYDft3TU5V upRq0stdRNcpW5M= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335D4101ECC; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 14:18:58 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.133.2.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D300101ECB; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 14:18:57 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Sixt Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= AVILA , Jeff King , =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= Avila via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Factorization of messages with similar meaning In-Reply-To: <96b2d1c2-895d-6196-df8d-ee1e9b6107ce@kdbg.org> (Johannes Sixt's message of "Sun, 5 Dec 2021 20:50:13 +0100") References: <8718669.4XknugNGDb@cayenne> <96b2d1c2-895d-6196-df8d-ee1e9b6107ce@kdbg.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:18:56 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5C24D762-56C9-11EC-B8C1-E10CCAD8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Sixt writes: > Am 05.12.21 um 18:25 schrieb Jean-No=C3=ABl AVILA: >> If needed, "%s and %s are mutually exclusive" could be turned into >> "options %s and %s are mutually exclusive" to make it clear that the >> placeholders can only hold option names. > > IMO, being less terse helps not only translators, but also users. > > Regarding this particular message, personally, I am not a fan of > "mutually exclusive" (sounds like it's been taken from a law text). How > about "options ... are incompatible" or "... cannot be used together"? Sounds good. Or perhaps "X cannot be used with Y", which may be even shorter and is still clear what it wants to say. X and Y are incompatible. X and Y cannot be used together. X cannot be used with Y.