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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS 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 BDCF01F5AE for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 06:10:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230009AbhEJGLz (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2021 02:11:55 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:59448 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229653AbhEJGLy (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2021 02:11:54 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 486E012EAF7; Mon, 10 May 2021 02:10:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=TRwRUBp06AbQys3f1kC64yR2/5K0APvhGoluUm dDU7g=; b=OScvrOLh/PEyBcvKL7A/ujNVDd3unW5VJCF1DXHk2JpJXabDBO+dva 62XnFQTdy1sCbA+Y69+INN6KyL/fTDaQdaNw8XaR7xnoUw3sVH2qQc/g+AJFqRUP V+xgqdOzcRw9uwoXGQvAPT0hJIC2EJqf6miqctlg1teLv6C2KdYGI= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C8912EAF5; Mon, 10 May 2021 02:10:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7AAEB12EAF4; Mon, 10 May 2021 02:10:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Alex Henrie , Git List , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy Subject: Re: [PATCH] graph: improve grammar of "invalid color" error message References: <20210509212220.29557-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:10:45 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Eric Sunshine's message of "Sun, 9 May 2021 18:02:51 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 764FD740-B156-11EB-B398-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Eric Sunshine writes: > On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 5:23 PM Alex Henrie wrote: >> Without the "d", it sounds like a command, not an error, and is liable >> to be translated incorrectly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie >> --- >> diff --git a/graph.c b/graph.c >> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static void parse_graph_colors_config(struct strvec *colors, const char *string) >> - warning(_("ignore invalid color '%.*s' in log.graphColors"), >> + warning(_("ignored invalid color '%.*s' in log.graphColors"), > > Another possibility: "ignoring invalid color ... in ..." > > Even better: "invalid color ... in ..." The last one, if it does not say what we did to that invalid thing, is not as helpful as Alex's or your "another possibility". Betweein "ignored" vs "ignoring", I do not have a preference, but whichever one is more prevalent in our existing messages should be used, I would think. Thanks.