From: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
"Jonathan Nieder" <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, "Erik Faye-Lund" <kusmabite@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Stable ab/i18n branch
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:05:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CBD352A.8040304@drmicha.warpmail.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vmxqb2hqk.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 19.10.2010 01:39:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Do you mean to re-arrange it so that there's a patch at the front of
>> the series that introduces gettext.h with only the fallbacks:
>>
>> #define _(s) (s)
>> #define N_(s) (s)
>>
>> And then merge the ~120 gettextize patches first and do the
>> infrastructure later?
>
> Not really.
>
> Two pieces that would be nice to have in 'master' (or even 'maint', if we
> consider avoiding merge conflicts and mismerges when fixes are queued
> there) are:
>
> 1. preparatory fixes to code that builds message string by concatenating
> parts of speech in English word ordering into buffer or emitting to
> output stream piece by piece; they should convert them to some form of
> sprintf-like format strings plus arguments. This does not necessarily
> have to mark the format strings with _(s).
>
> 2. the empty definitions for _(s) and N_(s).
>
> I would consider the first one part of general clean-up job, which we know
> will help i18n, but which we would want to do regardless of i18n. And it
> is probably the most error prone part in the whole process. The sooner
> the result of these two steps hit 'master', the less pain for everybody.
>
> And then:
>
> 3. actual marking of strings with _(s) and N_(s).
>
> which can be merged to 'next' after vetting for regression (the first two
> classes).
>
> 4. Adding and polishing of *.po files for actual messages and languages,
> i.e. l10n.
>
> This can happen pretty much independently from 3. Honestly I would be
> happier if I do not have to keep track of the actual l10n part.
>
> I think the current series to some degree conflates steps 1. and 3. As
> the list of risks I outlined in the previous message show, mistakes in 1.
> is much more grave than mistakes in 3. (iow, no big deal for having a few
> untranslated messages during early rounds of i18n support); I would have
> preferred these two steps were clearly separated, so that we can push the
> first two steps out to the 'master' sooner.
I'd just like to second (or third or..) Junio's points here since I had
suggested a split like that earlier already, and I think the current
state of affairs simply makes many potential reviewers (at least one
that I know of) go away.
1.,2. and (maybe to a lesser degree) also 3. should be able to find many
reviewers, thus making the potentially problematic parts as solid as
possible. (I'm still waiting for a conceptual approach to 4., i.e.
glossary first, but that is a different issue.)
Michael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-19 6:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-14 4:46 What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2010, #01; Wed, 13) Junio C Hamano
2010-10-14 5:51 ` Nazri Ramliy
2010-10-14 9:23 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-14 20:00 ` Stable ab/i18n branch Jonathan Nieder
2010-10-14 20:44 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-14 20:54 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-10-14 21:18 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-14 21:26 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2010-10-14 21:50 ` Jon Seymour
2010-10-15 4:54 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-15 0:07 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-10-15 5:16 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-15 5:28 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-10-15 5:35 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-17 4:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2010-10-17 12:33 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-17 15:59 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-10-18 23:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2010-10-19 6:05 ` Michael J Gruber [this message]
2010-10-17 4:43 ` What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2010, #01; Wed, 13) Junio C Hamano
2010-10-21 2:14 ` Johan Herland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4CBD352A.8040304@drmicha.warpmail.net \
--to=git@drmicha.warpmail.net \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=kusmabite@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).