GNU bug report logs - #37413
[PATCH 0/9] Channel news distribution mechanism

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>, 37413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#37413] [PATCH 0/9] Channel news distribution mechanism
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:41:02 +0200

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 05:27:37PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> As you’ve seen, the format I proposed does not rely on PO files and
> gettext at all:
> 
>   https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/37413#5
>

I did not read carefully before, but even with this format, a Guile
script could turn it into a POT file with multiple entries and another
Guile script could add translations from a PO file into such a news
file.




> Are you suggesting that it should rely on PO files?


Yes.  The format need not be changed.  PO file conversion scripts can
be added later, but should be a goal.




> We can discuss it,
> but that would be a significant change with technical challenges
> compared to what I propose.
> (Also keep in mind that the news mechanism
> aims to be available to third-party channels as well.)
> 

3rd parties would not need to use the PO file conversion scripts.



> Also, why do you mention “the package info”?  There’s no notion of a
> package here, so I wonder if there’s a misunderstanding.
> 

Channels contain packages whose summaries and descriptions need
translations as well, or do I misunderstand?  Admittedly, it will take
some time until guix-packages is translated, but it should be a goal.




> >> and (2) I think this is outside
> >> the scope of the TP.
> >> 
> >> Does that clarify?
> >> 
> >> Ludo’.
> >
> > I do not see why such translation should be outside the scope of the
> > TP?  I can only think of the speed of POT file acceptance and PO file
> > translators.
> 
> Speed would be a problem (POT files have to be manually accepted by
> Benno.)  But also, like I wrote earlier, (1) the TP is geared towards
> translating releases of software packages, and (2) and those news
> snippets could arrive anytime, not in sync with a “release.”
>
> > I am unsure if setting up Guix’ own translation team would attract
> > quicker translators than relying on the TP.
> 
> Yeah, having a real translation team is best, but in this case I don’t
> see how that could work.
> 
> Julien mentioned some time ago that we could run our own Pootle
> instance.  Maybe that could be helpful in this case.
> 
> Thank you,
> Ludo’.

I do not know what Benno thinks about this.  I would prefer this to be
handled by some Translation Project eventually.

Regards,
Florian

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.