[Sorry, I've only noticed now that the email didn't send!] On 30 April 2013 08:53, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > 2013/4/30 Jimmy O'Regan <[email protected]> >> On 29 April 2013 18:07, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi everybody, >> I'd prefer to have a meta-configuration: if it sees 'vblex', then >> generate 'pri.p3.sg', 'inf' and 'pp.m.sg', etc. and generate the >> configuration based on that. It would be trivial to add a task to >> dixtools to do this, and should be easy enough to do otherwise. > > > The automatic script already takes that kind of meta-configuration. You can > see an example at the end of > (http://wiki.apertium.org/wiki/User:Dtr5#Making_your_own_configuration_file). > > But that method has some problems: it is really slow (takes around 2 hours > for processing es-ca dictionaries with the sample configuration), it is
That seems wrong. There should be no reason for this to happen. The maximum that I would expect from a dixtools-based tool to do this would be a few seconds. Perhaps you should investigate that? >> > I encourage developers to test Simpledix >> > (http://apertium.vm.bytemark.co.uk/simpledix). It only has configuration >> > files for the es-ca pair, but it would give you a better understanding >> > of >> > the current state of the tool, and see how it could be improved. >> > >> > If somebody needs a bit more information, you can read the tutorial on >> > the >> > wiki (http://wiki.apertium.org/wiki/User:Dtr5). >> > >> > I am looking forward to hearing some feedback on this project. >> >> I really like the idea of having an easy to use interface for editing >> the dictionaries, but I'd like you to give some thought to the _next_ >> problem, too: what to do with the changes, to make it easier for users >> to contribute them. Passing whole dix files around can work, but would >> be quite a pain - it would be much better to be able to pass just the >> changes. Do you have any thoughts on that? > > > When you export the dictionaries, a simple xslt transformation puts all the > new entries at the end of the dictionary. I could provide only the > difference, greatly reducing the size of that download. > Sure, that's an option. There should be plenty of pre-built diff/patch tools out there. > As for uploading, I think nothing can be done. There are plenty of options. At the most basic, all of our interactions with SVN are via HTTP. At the very least, you can provide a configuration option to specify the address of the package in SVN, then download the files directly from there. With a little more effort, there are functions for SVN (http://php.net/manual/en/ref.svn.php) so at the very least, you can provide the revision number of the dictionaries that have been modified. Yet more complicated would be to use git as a backing store (e.g., using http://gitorious.org/git-php), and create a branch whenever someone edits the dictionaries. Language pair maintainers who are able to use git could pull directly, or git's machinery could be used to export patch sets. It would even give the option of allowing logged in users to pick up where they left off. -- <Sefam> Are any of the mentors around? <jimregan> yes, they're the ones trolling you ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2 _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
