On Ma, 2008-06-23 at 07:43 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Lars Kruse ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Hallo Christian > > > The bug that was mentioned above > > (http://bugs.locamotion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=347) contains a patch > > (http://bugs.locamotion.org/attachment.cgi?id=125&action=view) that should > > fix > > your problem in a quick-and-dirty way (but it works). > > > > It seems, that the discussion about the support for git v1.5.2 (and > > earlier) is > > not over, yet. > > (http://bugs.locamotion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=347#c15) > > So there is at least the possibilty that this fix will make it into the > > translate toolkit trunk (after cleaning the patch up). > > > > > > Maybe you could answer two questions: > > > > 1) does the above patch fix your problem? (I am not sure, if anyone tested > > git > > v1.4.x, yet ...) > > Actually, I installed a backported git-core package. Even on official > Debian servers, we are using this package, indeed..:-) What is the version number of the git package you are using? As I mentioned in the bug, the current version in Debian stable is too old for the current git support we have in our code, so we might want to reconsider the current version requirement. > > > > > 2) Would it be possible for you to use a patched translate toolkit? Or > > do you want/have to stick to the official debian packages? > > > No, we will not stick to official Debian packages. At least for this > software, which is central for that server. For i18n.debian.net, we > are using *some* packages from Debian testing, which includes Pootle > and the translate-toolkit. > > I don't have the server handy right now to check the version of Pootle > and TT packages. I think that Nicolas François updated Pootle to 1.1.0 > and TT to 1.1.1 but this has to be checked. > > PS: this week-end, I have worked on the setup of that server so that > it uses some Debian SVN and GIT repositories as reference. The real > showstopper here is resyncing things in the following case: > > 1) Project <foo> is a SVN checkout > 2) A Pootle user changes strings in <foo> for his|her language, say > tlh (Klingon). (s)he *does not* commit things back via Pootle > 3) The tlh.po file changes "upstream", ie in the SVN repository, for > instance because some new strings appear > 4) What happens when the Pootle user wants to commit things back? > There's an obvious case for an SVN conflict to appear, here Yes, this is where direct use of SVN would cause a conflict. Obviously a Pootle server can't afford a conflict, since the file would become unusable. Therefore Pootle will be conservative and will consider the version control system to be the authority and any conflicts in the local file get be converted to suggestions. These suggestions then need to be reviewed by a translator with 'review' rights. But at least we are sure we won't have broken files, and we should integrate well with whatever happened upstream. There is some more information here: http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/pootle/version_control#updating > I indeed feel like we would need a way to "reconcile" pending changes > in Pootle with upstream changes in PO files, in some way. Of course, > that can be done by local scripts, but having something, as part of > Pootle, that could deal with that by being launched periodically, > would help. I would definitely want to move these features out of Pootle and into the Translate Toolkit so that we can also make it a library function for other software, and to make a commandline program that can do this in a scriptable way. Currently, it is only really available in Pootle, though. Keep well Friedel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Translate-pootle mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/translate-pootle
