From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:27:12 GMT
Subject: Re: ab/i18n
Message-ID: <20110224102712.GC14115@elie>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimn_CmWORwJfWXEiY18QCmXdNZMhCUC9YBMo_kV@mail.gmail.com>

Erik Faye-Lund wrote:

> I like the idea, but perhaps we could auto-generate a Pig Latin
> translation or something instead?

Sorry for the fuss.  If I understand correctly, the remaining
issues with the current ab/i18n branch in 'pu' are:

* The series is too long to read in one sitting.

  Suggested fix: deal with some arbitrary early subset (35 patches?
  I'd even prefer around 20) first.

* Patch 2 (add GETTEXT_POISON) is conceptually complicated since
  its arbitrary string is not arbitrary.

  Suggested fix: split it into two patches.  But I am still not sure
  if that's considered acceptable?

* Patch 2 squats on a valuable use_poison() identifier space.

  Suggested fix: rename it to gettext_poison().

* Patches 5 (i18n: git-init basic messages) and onward do not
  explain "we are marking strings for translation, in
  preparation for translating them later" in their commit messages.

  Suggested fix: use titles like «i18n: mark some "git init" messages
  for translation».  Or ignore the problem --- it's not a big deal.

* We haven't run an automated tool to check that this is a no-op
  in the -UGETTEXT_POISON case.

  Suggested fix: build without debugging symbols and compare the
  binaries.  Or invent a tool to check patches.  Or just use our
  eyes, like we always have.

Does that sound like a fair summary?  I'd be happy to reroll the
first 30 or so patches following whatever approach is the consensus
for these things to move this forward.