[Sugar-devel] Conflicts in pootle

[Walter Bender]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:57 PM, James Simmons <nicestep at gmail.com> wrote:
> In "Make Your Own Sugar Activities!" I specifically tell people to run
> ./setup.py genpot.  If there's anything wrong in that chapter I'd like
> to correct it.  We need to fix the Spanish version too.

The problem is not in running genpot, it is in pushing the pot file to git.

We should recommend adding to .gitignore as previously suggested:

po/*


-walter
>
> The URL is:
>
> http://en.flossmanuals.net/ActivitiesGuideSugar/GoingInternationalWithPootle
>
> James Simmons
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Martin Langhoff
>> <martin.langhoff at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>>>> On 12.01.2011, at 19:07, Gary Martin wrote:
>>>>> So activity developers/maintainers should never ./setup genpot, or commit and push a .pot file when first building an activity?
>>>
>>> Gary -- correct. If github allowed hooks, I'd suggest a hook that
>>> rejects pushes that change anything in the .po file (unless the pusher
>>> is Pootle).
>>>
>>>> That's a very unusual setup. IMHO it should be the developer's choice when to generate the POT.
>>>
>>> Bert - I'm not an expert in PO and POT files, but Pootle seems to make
>>> the assumtion that everything under the po directory, including the
>>> POT file, is under its control.
>>>
>>> The POT file is generated automatically, based on your sources, so in
>>> general this should not be an issue. Special cases do exist I am sure
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> We could mess around with Pootle, but limited manpower from all sides
>>> says... let's try to avoid it. To wit - I drafted a change that would
>>> allow Pootle to override the POT file when necessary but I commented
>>> out.
>>>
>>> One oddity with Pootle is that it seems to treat the POT and PO files
>>> it works on as the main data repository. Initially I thought its main
>>> data was in the DB, and it would export to POT & PO files; but
>>> apparently that's not the case. The PO and POT files are the main data
>>> storage. So I am very hesitant to change how they are managed.
>>>
>>> OTOH, I may have misunderstood the Pootle code, we didn't work in
>>> depth on it :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> m
>>> --
>>>  martin.langhoff at gmail.com
>>>  martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
>>>  - ask interesting questions
>>>  - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
>>>  - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>> What is strange to me is that from Day One I had been operating under
>> the mistaken assumption that activity developers were suppose to push
>> changes to the POT file (but not the PO files) and have been doing so.
>> Why are conflicts only showing up now, and for only some of my
>> activities? Or had Sayamindu been cleaning things up behind the
>> scenes?
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>



-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org