From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B90DC2B9F2 for ; Sat, 22 May 2021 09:12:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 357CF6121E for ; Sat, 22 May 2021 09:12:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230137AbhEVJNa (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 May 2021 05:13:30 -0400 Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk ([85.233.160.19]:59438 "EHLO smtp.hosts.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230086AbhEVJNa (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 May 2021 05:13:30 -0400 Received: from host-92-1-139-132.as13285.net ([92.1.139.132] helo=[192.168.1.37]) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1lkNfw-000BS2-DD; Sat, 22 May 2021 10:12:04 +0100 Subject: Re: RFC: error codes on exit To: Alex Henrie , Felipe Contreras Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Git mailing list , Josh Steadmon , Jeff King , Jeff Hostetler References: <60a5afeeb13b4_1d8f2208a5@natae.notmuch> From: Philip Oakley Message-ID: <7f0c9ab8-c1ca-171b-8247-6d921702f3bc@iee.email> Date: Sat, 22 May 2021 10:12:03 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 21/05/2021 17:53, Alex Henrie wrote: > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 6:40 PM Felipe Contreras > wrote: >> It's good to not include many initial codes, but I would start with at >> least three: >> >> OK = 0, >> UNKNOWN = 1, >> NORMAL = 2, > If you go that route, could you please pick a word other than "normal" > to describe errors that are not entirely unexpected? I'm worried that > someone will see "normal" and use it instead of "OK" to indicate > success. > > -Alex Typical <== Normal Though abnormal and atypical often have different implications ;-) P.