Ludovic Courtès (2014-08-16 13:27 +0400) wrote:

[...]

> Computed strings like impede correct internationalization.  The whole
> sentences must be kept intact, to make sure people can translate them
> correctly.  So that means repeating things a bit, but that’s
> unavoidable.

Ah, indeed, I didn't think about internationalization.

>> I tried to avoid the code duplicating, so it became more compact and
>> perhaps less readable.  Also I added reporting about the packages to
>> upgrade: I thought as they are going to be replaced by the packages to
>> install, it is ok to add “(removed)” there.  So an output should look
>> like this (assuming "file-5.17" and "guile-2.0.9" are installed and are
>> being upgraded):
>>
>> The following packages will be upgraded (removed):
>>    file-5.17	out	/gnu/store/...
>>    guile-2.0.9	out	/gnu/store/...
>>
>> The following packages will be installed:
>>    file-5.18	out
>>    guile-2.0.11	out
>
> Ideally, I would just like to see:
>
>  The following packages will be upgraded:
>     file-5.17	out	/gnu/store/...
>     guile-2.0.9	out	/gnu/store/...
>
> and not see them listed under “will be installed.”

As you wish (although I would prefer to see what is upgraded and what is
installed in that manner).

> I would just keep the current messages for this patch series, and come
> up with an improved message format in a separate patch.
>
> WDYT?

No problem, so here are the patches again (the second one is modified: I
forgot to delete one unused line last time).  And just in case I'm
mentioning an issue with ‘manifest-show-transaction’ again: unlike
‘show-what-to-remove/install’, it doesn't display an output path of a
package item, because a store should be used for that.  So should
something be done with it?