Julien added the comment:
> From what I know of regional and country variations in spanish, [...] we
> (pydev) should not worry until there is an actual conflict from competing
> translations.
Totally agree.
> The patch has this table:
> + # version, target, isdev
> + ('3.4', WWWROOT + "/3.4", False),
> + ('3.5', WWWROOT + "/3.5", False),
> + ('3.6', WWWROOT + "/3.6", True),
> + ('2.7', WWWROOT + "/2.7", False)
Yes, it sticks to the current style:
https://github.com/python/docsbuild-scripts/blob/master/build_docs.py#L33
> Why is 3.4 included, given that it now has the same status as 3.3?
What do you mean with "the same status" ? From my translator point of view,
they still diverges, like in `Doc/library/zlib.rst:233`:
< "If the optional parameter *max_length* is supplied then the return value "
---
> "If the optional parameter *max_length* is non-zero then the return value "
And I don't think we can rely on certain releases being theorically identical
to others, it look like an exception, look like it's not always true. I still
prefer having a [clear tree of versions](https://github.com/AFPy/python_doc_fr)
but we're (humans) only translating the latest version, we have scripts
replicating our work to others.
Yet, if you tell me that there's work ongoing (that I clearly missed) to have
every documentations, like by major version, converge to single one, with just
some paragraphs added, it may simplify my hierarchy.
> Would it not be easier to default to False and only list 3.6?
Again I stick to the current style of the script, so ease its reading as a
whole, but I agree, if we change it, let change it in another commit?
> Is it because you maintain separate branches for different 3.x branches?
> Given the presence of Version Changed and Version Added paragraphs, that is
> almost unnecessary. (Not having Version Deleted items is the main reason
> they might be.)
I am not aware of "Version Added" and "Version Changed" paragraphs, I
understand that this is a policy to only add new paragraphs and never modify
them inside the `3` major version ? This is cool for me, as said in my last
paragraph, it may reduce the number of versionned `.po`, but it will not change
the human workload (script replicating between po files ...).
> Is/are the main author/maintainer(s) of build_docs.py already nosy on the
> issue, to review?
Yes, I soon `nosy`ed Benjamin Peterson, look like he's the father of this
script, if we trust commits here:
https://github.com/python/docsbuild-scripts/commits/master
I even mailed him personally to speak about it (and he even replied once), but
he's probably highly busy, and this is something I can understand. So here is
my call on the issue to try to move this issue forward (I try to push this
project less than once a month, to avoid buzzing everyone ears with this
non-critical issue...).
> I cannot even though at least mildly interested. (The disconnect between
> interest and technical expertise is part of the problem with translation
> issues.)
Yes I also fully understand that the french translation of the documentation is
not a point of interest for most of you upstream ^^ don't worry.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue26546>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
