On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 20:47:35 +0100
Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > Add --no-location to XGETTEXT_OPTIONS in po/Makevars.
> > > Now those stupid comment lines with the source file and line
> > > number are no longer generated (what use were they in the first
> > > place?)!
> >
> > Well... I'm aware that
Quoting Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net):
> How often do people make use of the information, and what for?
When it comes at me: never.
I very much prefer having the "previous original version" comments
(lines starting with #|) that help *a lot* spotting what changed in a
fuzzy string (intelli
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 08:22:01PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Roger Leigh may or may not have written...
>
> > On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 05:53:02PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> >> I demand that Neil Williams may or may not have written...
> >>> Churn is the problem here, IMHO. Many pac
I demand that Roger Leigh may or may not have written...
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 05:53:02PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
>> I demand that Neil Williams may or may not have written...
>>> Churn is the problem here, IMHO. Many packages just change too fast at
>>> specific times to allow generated fil
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 05:53:02PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Neil Williams may or may not have written...
>
> > Churn is the problem here, IMHO. Many packages just change too fast at
> > specific times to allow generated files like the POT into the VCS. i.e.
> > the source code is
I demand that Neil Williams may or may not have written...
[snip]
> It comes down to a problem with the gettext design - it's too tightly
> integrated into the upstream build process
Not to mention the source itself, given that the .pot is (normally) generated
by invoking a specific target in po/
On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 06:49:12 +0200
Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org):
>
> (of course, I mostly disagree with the initial comment as most, if not
> nearly all, Debian developers are now very i18n-friendly and most of
> the time do what's needed to make translat
Quoting Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org):
(of course, I mostly disagree with the initial comment as most, if not
nearly all, Debian developers are now very i18n-friendly and most of
the time do what's needed to make translators' work easier)
> Translators don't want their work discarded, upstr
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 20:27:13 +0700
wrote:
> Why Debian maintainers never generate pot files in source packages?
This generalisation is undeserved. There are packages that contain up
to date POT files in the source package - I maintain several. However,
it does need to be only some which package t
Why Debian maintainers never generate pot files in source packages? It makes
translation very difficult, not surprising no-one interested in translation.
Is there some policy which controls that?
10 matches
Mail list logo
