On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 11:36:46 +0200 Martin Quinson wrote:
Hello Martin, thanks for your prompt reply.
the truth is that the development of po4a is kinda stopped since a few
years. We do the basic maintainance, like reviewing and applying
proposed patches (with some delays), but I don't manage to devote any
time to the new wanted features myself. I'm sorry about that, but this
is a fact.
OK, I assume the same holds for the other upstream authors of po4a
(or do you just speak for yourself?).
As a result, I think that you should develop this module yourself.
I can try, with some help from you and the other po4a upstream
understand that Perl will make your brain burn as a Ruby programmer,
My brain is probably already burnt, due to overexposure to Fortran, but
I digress... ;-)
The fact is that I haven't programmed in Perl for about 14 years and my
Perl knowledge was just a smattering anyway, so bear with me!
but at the end, developping a new module for po4a is very easy. And
can guide you in this process if you go that way.
Your guidance will be much appreciated, thanks a lot!
Check the doc on writing a new module, here:
I will study this soon, thanks for pointing it out.
In the meanwhile, I have to study the Ruby document format description
in more detail.
I think that this is a good idea to keep both the upstream list and
the debian bug in CC while discussing it. It will ensure both a good
diffusion and a good archiving of the discussions.
OK, I am replying to both the bug address and the po4a-devel mailing
Please keep me in Cc, when replying (as I am not subscribed to the
mailing list or to the bug). Thanks.
There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE