[Top][All Lists]

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

[bug#37413] [PATCH 0/9] Channel news distribution mechanism

From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: [bug#37413] [PATCH 0/9] Channel news distribution mechanism
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 17:27:37 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)


"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <address@hidden> skribis:

> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 03:39:38PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <address@hidden> skribis:
>> > You mean it takes too long for the TP coordinator to accept new
>> > versions of PO files?
>> I mean two things: (1) there will not be PO files (see the format of
>> news entries proposed in this issue),
> It is easy to write a Guile script that prints a PO file with the news
> file content inserted as the msgid of a single entry, if xgettext does
> not support this already.  Then there would be two PO files, one for
> the news file and one for the package info, that could be concatenated
> by msgcat to a single file.  Guix could ship with this tooling for
> channel authors and an explanation for how to submit the resulting POT
> file to the Translation Project.
> I think a single file is easier for translators to manage than two
> files and typically we’d want news files and packages to be translated
> by the same (group of) translator(s).

As you’ve seen, the format I proposed does not rely on PO files and
gettext at all:

Are you suggesting that it should rely on PO files?  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.)

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

>> 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,

reply via email to

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