Re: [PATCH] PRItime: wrap PRItime for better l10n compatibility

From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "Jean-Noël Avila" <jn.avila@free.fr>,
	"Jiang Xin" <worldhello.net@gmail.com>,
	"Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PRItime: wrap PRItime for better l10n compatibility
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 13:21:41 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1.1707221320350.4271@virtualbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7ez1j0wv.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 823 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, 21 Jul 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jean-Noël Avila <jn.avila@free.fr> writes:
> 
> > Le 20/07/2017 à 20:57, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> >>
> >> +	git diff --quiet HEAD && git diff --quiet --cached
> >> +
> >> +	@for s in $(LOCALIZED_C) $(LOCALIZED_SH) $(LOCALIZED_PERL); \
> >
> > Does PRIuMAX make sense for perl and sh files?
> 
> Not really; I did this primarily because I would prefer to keep
> things consistent, anticipating there may be some other things we
> need to replace before running gettext(1) for other reasons later.

It would add unnecessary churn, too, to add those specific exclusions and
make things inconsistent: the use of PRItime in Perl or shell scripts
would already make those scripts barf. And if it is unnecessary churn...
let's not do it?

Ciao,
Dscho