[PATCH] Xffm intltoolized

[edscott wilson garcia]

El mié, 02-03-2005 a las 19:14 +0900, Daichi Kawahata escribió:
> Hi Edscott,
> 
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:06:04 -0600
> edscott wilson garcia wrote:
> 
> > I followed your instructions to the letter, but after doing a make,
> > the generated desktop files are still devoid of all translations.
> 
> I had missed adding language codes (fa, hi, ne), it's first time
> to see such a gigantic language, that's great ;)
> 
> > These should be the same string. That is intentional. 
> 
> Please take a look at the following (as far as I know just three)
> cases,

All desktop files contain translations, and the most extensive are in
Xffm.desktop and Xfsamba.desktop. But after following the revert steps,
none of the regenerated files keep the translations. Most probably
something went wrong in the revert process.

> 
> As above, you'd notice translators don't always follow the original
> English, sometimes having different translation for their needs. I
> don't know what kind of intention there is, but please re-consider
> if it isn't require, the must.

Not a must. A translator priviledge.

> 
> Also, you might think it's redundant creating a new PO file has less
> than 10 strings, but I think it'll be effective, especially on
> modifying an original string i.e. if you'll change string, it'll been
> reflected immediately via intltool in PO files, otherwise you have no
> way letting translators know your modifying other than posting ML or
> it'll be checked translator (including me) themselves.
> 
> > For the development tree, obsolete translations should not be
> > removed since they may still be used later on.
> 
> I've restored whole obsolete translation in the each PO files,
> migrated translations in desktop files to those files, fixed
> error (msgid "%ld xxx" : msgstr "%l xxx", msgid "%s xxx" : msgstr
> "xxx"), it's really large (tar bzip2, 278k). Well, can I send a
> mail to you directly?
> 
> PS. A results.patch is just showing there's no lack of translation.

Indeed. I can see from the patch that it is working at your site. Why
don't you do a "make distclean" and then get a patch for the entire
directory as compared to current cvs (you can use xfdiff4 for this) and
send it to me off list?

If everything works OK I'll commit to CVS, if not, you'll hear from
me ;-)


regards,

Edscott


-- 
edscott wilson garcia <edscott at xfce.org>