Hi, On Sat, 22 Jul 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes: > > >> >> A very small hack on gettext. > > > > I am 100% opposed to this hack. It is already cumbersome enough to find > > out what is involved in i18n (it took *me* five minutes to find out that > > much of the information is in po/README, with a lot of information stored > > *on an external site*, and I still managed to miss the `make pot` target). > > > > If at all, we need to make things easier instead of harder. > > > > Requiring potential volunteers to waste their time to compile an > > unnecessary fork of gettext? Not so great an idea. > > > > Plus, each and every Git build would now have to compile their own > > gettext, too, as the vanilla one would not handle the .po files containing > > %<PRItime>!!! > > > > And that requirement would impact instantaneously people like me, and even > > worse: some other packagers might be unaware of the new requirement which > > would not be caught during the build, and neither by the test suite. > > Double bad idea. > > If I understand correctly, the patch hacks the input processing of > xgettext (which reads our source code and generates po/git.pot) so > that when it sees PRItime, pretend that it saw PRIuMAX, causing it > to output %<PRIuMAX> in its output. Oh, I missed that. That's even worse, as it precludes what you were wishing for: to replace timestamp_t by a signed data type eventually. Ciao, Dscho
