[Denis Barbier] > Hi Petter, I will do what you request, this is a rather trivial > change, but please give me detailed instructions for all cases (1 > means that the file is present, 0 it is missing): > > no.po | nb.po > ------+------ > 0 | 0
Silent, as there is no translation present. > 1 | 0 Warn, request that the file is renamed from no.po to nb.po. > 0 | 1 Silent, as everything is OK. > 1 | 1 -> maybe with subcases to test if files are symlinks, > different, ... Warn, as the two files are supposed to be only one file. If you fix your package to use nb.po for both 'nb' and 'no', I see no reason to have both files present, and believe one of the should be removed to make sure the effort is spent keeping only one file up to date. > I have almost no opinion on how to handle such a transition, you can > discuss this issue with other interested people and tell me what to > do when you come to a consensus. Unless someone protests, I suggest you implement my suggestion from above. > AFAICT people should be discouraged from using the _NO variants > (there is no need to be more specific than needed) so they were not > considered in the table above. I agree.
