[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

lynx-dev Sending lynx.po to translators (was: Submissions for `dev1')

From: Webmaster Jim
Subject: lynx-dev Sending lynx.po to translators (was: Submissions for `dev1')
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:21:30 -0400

On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 05:41:05PM -0500, Klaus Weide wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Webmaster Jim wrote:
> > Unfortunately I have not had the spare cycles lately to straighten this
> > out. Can someone take a look at the Translation Project standards and
> > help me set up a re-package of the Lynx tar file so that the robot can
> > be happy?
> Don't repackage, if that's not really necessary.
> The robot doesn't look at tar files anyway AFAIK.
> F. Pinard:
> > I just noticed that the Translation Project robot received a few submissions
> > for either `Lynx-2.8.4dev.1' or `lynx-2.8.4.dev1',
> Lynx-dev has been using the following scheme for quite some time (years)
> consistently:
> (read the '^' caret characters as rotated 'less then' signs)
>     2.8.2dev.1
>           ^
> > both schemes are not being ready to be processed by the robot.
> Possible solutions:
> 1.) Only make the TP aware of "releases", use only the (curently)
>     three left digits (the short version to the right of "a.k.a.").
> 2.) "We" (lynx-dev) change our numbering.
> 3.) The robot is modified, if necessary, to grok our scheme.
> 4.) Somebody has to translate from our scheme to one acceptable
>     by the robot.  Basically what Jim Spath has in mind with
>     "re-packaging".
> 3.) is preferable in my opinion.  If any changes are necessary to the
> TP's procedures, they should not be difficult.
> Alternative 4.) adds another layer of confusion and another place where
> things may go wrong, or not happen in a timely manner.  

I now think the "re-package" is the wrong approach; we simply need to
pass a URL via a mail message to the robot address that a new Lynx
version with possibly new messages has been created. We could add this
to the script that does the code check-out when building the source
archives and web-indexing them. Then I don't need to do it myself. I
just need the numbering scheme that the robot will recognize, and a
possibly unique URL to advise the robot that this version is new.

> > We would also need the PO file in advance for any translator submission.
> So "somebody" has to execute the algorithm
>    IF
>        lynx.pot is substantially different from the previous version
>    THEN
>        mail lynx.pot to TP <address@hidden>
> It would be best if Tom could do that when he updates the code for
> download...

See above paragraph.  

> > Please attempt to use common versioning schemes before introducing others,
> > or make sure I modify the robot in advance for the schemes you introduce.
> Please make the robot understand our versioning scheme.

Right.  Lynx numbering goes back several years...
Marvin the Paranoid Android says:
I mean where's the percentage in being kind or helpful to a robot if it
doesn't have any gratitude circuits?
(This is the actual fortune for today -- I'm not making this up: Jim)

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]