On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:34 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
>
> > On 24 Mar 2022, at 06:17, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The comment and errmsg_plural don't seem to be consistent. When the
> > code was added by c4f2a0458d, it had only singular form and already
> > had the comment. After that 8032d76b5 turned it to errmsg_plural
> > ignoring the comment. It seems like a thinko of 8032d76b5.
>
> Following the bouncing ball, that seems like a reasonable conclusion, and
> removing the plural form should be fine to reduce translator work.
Yes, the singular version of the message isn't required at all as
numReportedClient > 1. Hence I proposed to remove errmsg_plural and
singular version.
Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.