[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Make GNUN more user-friendly

From: Thérèse Godefroy
Subject: Re: Make GNUN more user-friendly
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:06:59 +0200

Le mercredi 28 août 2013 à 17:25 +0000, Ineiev a écrit :

>  > when
>  > there is a new French translation, the po, pot and html have to be
>  > checked out separately so that cvs can update them.
> Doesn't 'cvs up $new_file' work?

Update doesn't seem to work if the CVS entries don't mention the new
file. But maybe I did something wrong.
What I do is 'cvs co $new_files', after making sure that the new
translation is not in the way. Nothing to worry about, it has to be
done only once.

>  >>  > When
>  >>  > a translated page is regenerated locally, the POT is often regenerated
>  >>  > as well,
>  >>
>  >> This sounds like a bug. do you know how to reproduce it?
>  >
>  > This happened most of (all?) the time before I started restoring www
>  > after a validation, quite a few months ago. I could try again after
>  > reinstalling what's needed to use the "big" GNUmakefile.
> Then probably it doesn't worth trying.

What's needed is mostly in server/. I could add it without too much

>  >> Ideally, validation errors should be fixed in www;
>  > [...]
>  >
>  > I don't quite agree. Correcting errors after GNUN reports them on
>  > trans-coord-discuss (if this is what you mean)
> I assumed the context of broken headers; I meant that the user
> should commit a fix rather than exclude them from validation.

Fine, but it depends on the user. A translator is primarily concerned 
with her translation, not with the site itself. She usually doesn't 
have much time to spare, and can't afford to be distracted by side 
issues, but still would like to have a decent page to proofread.
People who are interested in fixing the site can use the complete

>  > I agree that the configuration should be done beforehand. It shouldn't
>  > be part of the script.
>  > While we are at it, why not make a nice-looking deb out of all that, and
>  > use Debconf?
> To tell the truth, I don't clearly understand what "all" is, what
> Debconf is, and...

"All" is "all there is in trans-coord/gnun/server/gnun". You would get a
set of packages (binary, source, etc.). The "binaries" could be
installed as usual, with dependencies taken care of, without any need
for autoconf et al.

Debconf is something you wouldn't like because it is made to be
interactive.  ;) 
It stores configuration parameters after (or before) installation of the
package, using defaults or data provided by the user. The debconf
database can then be used by the post-installation script and some other

> Yes, and I don't feel that this interactivity is really useful (it may
> be just a matter of habits); for example, why the list may need
> checking at all? what is the point of always choosing "1"?

For instance, if the list contains both updates and proofreadings, I
will remove the proofreading from the first pass of transvalidate, and
commit with "1" (Update), then do a second pass and commit with
"2" (Proofreading). If some POs only had a few modifications, there
would be a third pass with "3" (Minor fix). Pure laziness.

Anyway, this part doesn't apply to CVS. I don't know about SVN.


reply via email to

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