Hi, On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Jiang Xin wrote:
> 2017-07-22 19:28 GMT+08:00 Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de>: > > > > On Sat, 22 Jul 2017, Jiang Xin wrote: > > > >> 2017-07-22 7:34 GMT+08:00 Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com>: > >> > Jiang Xin <worldhello....@gmail.com> writes: > >> > > >> >> A very small hack on gettext. > > > > I am 100% opposed to this hack. > > It's really very small, see: > > * https://github.com/jiangxin/gettext/commit/b0a72643 I don't care about size. Insecure, pampered white men may be concerned about size; not I. I am concerned about an *unnecessary* deviation from a well-established and well-maintained piece of software that would all of a sudden be version-coupled with Git. > > If at all, we need to make things easier instead of harder. > > If it is only the l10n coordinate's duty to generate po/git.pot, the > tweak is OK. No. You want to keep the bus number high. > I agree. We just go with the sed-then-cleanup version until we meet > ambiguities (I mean some words other than PRItime need to be > replaced). Even then. Even then you should want to avoid version-coupling Git versions with gettext versions. Because that's precisely what you would do, as gettext would now have to know about *this* Git version's interpretation of certain data type names. Ciao, Dscho
