El dilluns, 20 de juny de 2016, a les 23:47:43 CEST, Luigi Toscano va=20
escriure:
> Burkhard L=FCck ha scritto:
> > Am Dienstag, 12. April 2016, 16:22:03 CEST schrieb Luigi Toscano:
> >> Chusslove Illich ha scritto:
> >>>> [: Luigi Toscano :]
> >>>> So the question is: are there any major blocker for implementing the
> >>>> change from the current pattern to <program>.desktop.po?
> >>>=20
> >>> I have just one little note: there already exist one catalog named
> >>> plasma_shell_org.kde.plasma.desktop.po, that is not a desktop PO. Not
> >>> sure
> >>> if that will cause some confusion somewhere. And renaming this one
> >>> catalog
> >>> to something else may also be not nice, because it follows the revers=
e-
> >>> domain naming pattern.
> >=20
> > All catalogs in trunk kf5 with naming scheme "*desktop.po" but no deskt=
op
> > file:
> >=20
> > docmessages: kcontrol_desktop.po + plasma-desktop.po
> >=20
> > gui messages:
> > kcm_kwindesktop.po, plasma_applet_org.kde.plasma.showdesktop.po,
> > plasma_runner_plasma-desktop.po,  plasma_shell_org.kde.plasma.desktop.po
> >=20
> >>> (In the summit I didn't want to think about this, so as a precaution I
> >>> set
> >>> it to be renamed to plasma_shell_org.kde.plasma__desktop.po.)
> >>=20
> >> Good point: this won't probably happen too much, but maybe we can defi=
ne
> >> a
> >> custom prefix which is not going to conflict with normal use cases?
> >> Maybe
> >> <program>._desktop.po
> >> <program>._json.po
> >> ?
> >=20
> > What these catalogs (desktop, json, appdata, mimetypes) have in common =
is
> > that they are generated by scripty for internal use only.
> >=20
> > We already have the suffix "_qt.po" to distinguish between Gettext and =
Qt
> > translation system.
> >=20
> > Similar we could use a suffix like e.g. "_scripty.po" for the catalogs
> > generated by scripty for internal usage.
> >=20
> > *_desktop_scripty.po
> > *_json_scripty.po
> > *_mimetypes_scripty.po
> > *_appdata_scripty.po
> > or a reverse naming scheme
>=20
> Using scripty as marker is a possible solution. I personally don't like t=
oo
> much to use "scripty" explicitly but I wouldn't oppose the solution.
> I'd like to propose to break the _<something>_scripty.po part with a dot
> instead of a simply _, but it would be just for clarity.

Anything that is unambiguous enough that it won't be part of a "regular"=20
catalog is good enough

Cheers,
  Albert

>=20
> Ciao