Re: [PATCH 10/25] gettextize: git-merge basic messages
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 3, 2010, 13:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTi=5MrU-JyeQ3UVNbVwzn-8FbstUXafgcQaLWXDB@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20100902203711.GE2531@burratino>
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 20:37, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 25 quoted lines
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> It's on top of pu, > [...] >> But I was hoping that this would >> make it into pu and after next gets released Any Day Now most of those >> other tips in pu would be folded into next along with gettext, or at >> least the merge conflicts wouldn't be too painful. > > Hmm. That really constrains people trying to merge this series. > > As SubmittingPatches explains: > > - In the exceptional case that a new feature depends on several topics > not in 'master', start working on 'next' or 'pu' privately and send > out patches for discussion. Before the final merge, you may have to > wait until some of the dependent topics graduate to 'master', and > rebase your work. > > so this is fine for discussion, but for merging, having to pull in > _all_ topics from pu (or all topics from next for that matter) for > the patches to apply really is a problem. > > Both next and pu get rewound from time to time. They are not meant > to be a stable basis for patches.
Junio: I've started work to rebase this whole thing on master, when I'm done the result should be able to replace the existing ab/i18n series you have, i.e. it won't have the Conflicts your "Merge branch 'ab/i18n'" commits have.
Also, I'm going to add a special POISON mode to Git so that we can check if changing these messages breaks anything in the test suite, basically:
make GETTEXT_POISON=YesPlease
Which enables this in gettext.h:
#ifdef GETTEXT_POISON
#define _(s) "GETTEXT POISON"
#else
#define _(s) gettext(s)
#endifWhich in my preliminary tests makes a bunch of tests fail, most of it is stuff like this in t0001-init.sh:
# grep "Initialized empty" again/out1 &&
# grep "Reinitialized existing" again/out2 &&
# >again/empty &&
# test_cmp again/empty again/err1 &&
# test_cmp again/empty again/err2I.e. just something using the porcelain messages that are OK to translate. I'm going to add a new NO_GETTEXT_POISON test prereq to all of these, anything that remains would then indicate plumbing messages that shouldn't be translated.
Unfortunately we *don't* have complete test coverage so these sort of tests may miss something. But it should make this series a lot more robust.