Hi Helge, the po4a upstream developers list,
Le 02/11/2011 10:15, Helge Kreutzmann a écrit :
> First a typo/question:
> "The configuration file consists of several sections, general, XML/XSL "
> "support, POD support and HTML support."
(that's a po4a-build(1) string)
> Looks like "general" is spelled with a lower case "g", however in the
> next string:;
> "General includes the name and location of the po4a config file (probably "
> "best to leave this as <filename>po4a.config</filename>), the po directory "
If I understood correctly “general” is a just word, “global” would have
fit here as well, it's just the “common” part of the po4a-build.conf(5)
file. So I don't think there is any typo here, but Neil should be able
to enlighten us here.
> -"This define a module alias named B<test>, based on the B<man> module, with "
> +"This defines a module alias named B<test>, based on the B<man> module, with "
> The next one I only mention once, but I saw it several times (e.g. in
> doc/po4a-build.conf.5.pod:35 and lib/Locale/Po4a/Sgml.pm:47 as well):
> -msgid "Extra options for B<msgmerge>."
> +msgid "Extra options for B<msgmerge>(1)."
It's not fundamentally an error, I don't even know if we want to fix it,
the po4a upstream developers list CCed to gather more opinions.
> Btw. you use different markup for denoting programs, e.g. in
> po4a-translate:30 you use L<>.
It's a POD feature, see perlpod(1) (not all manual shipped in po4a have
a POD source).
> I'm not sure if that can be unfuzzied and also you might consider
> using the same phrase (albeit needing the same fix) from
> po4a-updatepo:92? to remove one almost duplicate string.
> -msgid "List the documentation format understood by po4a."
> +msgid "List the documentation formats understood by po4a."
> See also above:
> -msgid "List the documentation format handled by po4a."
> +msgid "List the documentation formats handled by po4a."
Plural was already used in the (few) translated languages I was able to
understand, so I also unfuzzyed all of them (anyway, grammar rules vary
among language). Since “understood” was already used in po4a-gettextize,
po4a-normalize, and po4a-translate, I fixed po4a-updatepo to use the
same wording (s/handled/understood).
> This one I'm not 100% sure, please check:
> -"provided PO file should be the translation of the POT file which were "
> +"provided PO file should be the translation of the POT file which was "
Agreed, unfuzzyed too.
> -"the addition of a new module boring, to make sure the documentation is "
> +"the addition of a new module boring, because you had to make sure the documentation is "
I'm not sure if the original sentence of Locale::Po4a::Chooser(3) is
wrong, even if yours sounds better. The rest of the string might need
fixing too, more comments are welcome.
> As long as this bug is open, I can continue filing the typos found
> here, how would you like to proceed in the future?
Fine for me, I think other active po4a contributors are following the
BTS too, I just CCed the po4a upstream developers list to make sure of
that. For future typos, providing an actual patch[es serie] one could
review and acknowledge directly would be even more welcome, you may send
them directly to <po4a-devel(a)lists.alioth.debian.org> (it's a low
traffic list you may consider subscribing to).
On 19/11/2011 09:48, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 12:56:23PM -0400, David Prévot wrote:
>> Fine for me, I think other active po4a contributors are following the
>> BTS too, I just CCed the po4a upstream developers list to make sure of
>> that. For future typos, providing an actual patch[es serie] one could
>> review and acknowledge directly would be even more welcome, you may send
>> them directly to <po4a-devel(a)lists.alioth.debian.org> (it's a low
>> traffic list you may consider subscribing to).
> I just checked in a new version (which seems to have caused a
> problem?) and have found some more typos/improvement possibilites.
> However, this raises two problems:
> a) Often I would like to explain the change (e.g. "I'm unsure" or
> "merge with" or ...), how should I do this in the patch?
That's the beauty with patches series: it's possible to actually prepare
atomic commits, with one change by commit, and a meaningful commit
message for each change. Other people can then acknowledge (or not) the
whole series, or each individual commit, eventual amending those some of
them, making quite easy the task to apply them ones agreed.
That's actually one of the reason why I use “git svn”: it allows to
prepare the changes, eventually reorder them (and even merge similar
ones) with “git rebase -i”, and propose them (or directly commit them as
I did with your previous proposals I had no doubt with). It makes it
easier to revert a specific commit if someone disagrees afterward too.
You can then prepare the patch series with “git format-patch” and send
them directly to the list or the bug report with “git send-email” (no
attachment needed ;-).
[ I must admit that I'm still discovering Git, which seems like a pretty
efficient toy, and I can't stop playing with it. ]
Even after a simple “svn diff > fixes.patch”, one can add comments in
the mail or bug report, quoting part or all of the diff in the message,
and also attach the file in order to ease the reviewing process.
I guess you could even prepare a review branch in the po4a tree (I did
something like that a year ago, when I prepared a huge review of
typographic and convention stuff of the documentation).
> I'm not
> sure I can dig out all commenting methods properly? Do you think
> keeping the previous style would be possible?
I'm not sure I understood, could you please rephrase?
> b) As upstream is using an e-mail list on alioth, I cannot mail them
> (cf. bug #582765, hopefully the maintainer of courier-mta somewhen
> talks to me :-(().
Wow, that's annoying (glad to use Dovecot on my servers, It seems like
I'm not the only one ), I'm surprised to discover this issue only
now: if Alioth is affected, a lot of people might be in a black hole… I
guess you can always send unsigned mails without attachment, and
eventually provide an URL to the files, but that may be boring for you.
> For your planning, I hope to get another batch done during December, so
> depending on your next targetted upload
I don't know, there has not been a lot of changes recently, but Nicolas
added a feature this summer (in order to translate control files), and I
would love to see the po4a package in the Debian archive in order to
provide a patch for debtags to include tags descriptions. Some
translations are already available on package.d.o, my wish would be,
once include in debtags, to offer the translated tags descriptions in
various front-ends like aptitude…
Sadly, I haven't prepared any debtag patch yet to include those
translations, but when I'll find some time to do so, I'll ask for a
revision release of po4a (if the German translation is not complete
then, we'll upload another revision before or during the freeze to make
it complete anyway).
Nicolas, in case you've read so far, could you please remind me the
needed commands to generate the PO and control files for debsums from
the packages.d.o PO files (just in case you still have them handy, I'll
reproduce something if I've been silly enough not to save my history).
Anyway, we'll send a mail to translators with incomplete translation at
least ten days before the next release.
>  I got an e-mail with
> The reason it is being held:
> Message body is too big: 99476 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
Well, it's quite self explained: too big messages don't go to the commit
list. I don't think it's really an issue: too big changes are generally
update translations (so it should not really need any review from the
po4a developers, given that such review would already have happen in a
translation coordination mailing list, and that po4a developers might
not be qualified in $language anyway ;-), or PO and POT update after
some massive change, so a call for translation will follow anyway.
retitle 631874 po4a: [xml] Please make xml:lang automatically translated
Hi Charles, the po4a upstream developers list,
[ Please refer to
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=631874 for full context ]
Le 02/11/2011 22:40, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 03:20:30PM -0400, David Prévot a écrit :
>> The lang attribute is already automatically translated. In order to
>> translate the xml:lang one, adding the “attributes=xml:lang” option is
>> enough for your purpose, as documented in Locale::Po4a::Xml(3).
>> I don't know if we want to make this attribute automatically (i.e. by
>> default) translated, any opinion about it?
> In the case of the xml:lang, in my (limited) experience, I do not see a
> situation where it would cause me problem to have it translated by default.
I don't know the exact rationale of using xml:lang instead of lang, a
look at some documentation  makes me think that the intended use of
xml:lang is to allow the use of several languages in different section
of a same page. (Side note: Charles, in your example, why are you using
the xml:lang attribute instead of the lang one that already exists for
the html tag?)
If xml:lang was translated by default, it may cause harm in the
following situation (crappy novice XML inside):
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">
<p>Some translatable text</p>
<img alt="Image with boring English untranslated text inside"
If both lang and xml:lang are translated, since it's the same string,
they both will show e.g. fr for a French translation, but the resulting
translated file will be wrong:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="fr">
<p>Du texte traduisible</p>
<img alt="Image contenant avec du texte anglais intraduisible"
Even if the image still ships English text inside, it will be declared
as French content, which is not true.
I guess that making xml:lang translated by default may harm in some
cases, so I won't be in favor of changing the current default behavior,
but someone with more XML experience could enlighten us otherwise, so I
keep the bug open for the moment.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
po4a has moved to Subversion some time ago, but the old CVS repository
is still available on Alioth. Because of that, the online view  of
the repository is broken (only showing the CVS one).
Unless someone disagrees, I'll ask Alioth admins to remove the old CVS
repository in a week (and if you agree before, I'll be glad to ask for
its removal right now).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
tags 647192 pending
> http://po4a.alioth.debian.org/download.php does not show up translated in
> french. This is rather strange because I browsed the svn sources online, and
> /po4a/po/www/fr.po seems to contain french translations for this page.
Thanks for the pointer. The translation was actually outdated (so the
page wasn't translated, being less than 80 % complete), that's fixed now.
The Spanish and Japanese translation have already been updated, and the
Polish and Russian could also be updated. Please note that the website
is now in it's own directory <URL:svn://svn.debian.org/svn/po4a/web>, so
are the PO files.
The site now needs a rebuild/update to display up-to-date translations.