[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n-doc
Subject:    Re: Renaming desktop_<module>_<program>.po file
From:       Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano () tiscali ! it>
Date:       2018-04-12 22:13:52
Message-ID: 7f967f7c-35e1-cbda-b93c-4670f9d3b2d0 () tiscali ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

Albert Astals Cid ha scritto:
> El dilluns, 20 de juny de 2016, a les 23:47:43 CEST, Luigi Toscano va 
> escriure:
>> Burkhard Lück 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?
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 reverse-
>>>>> domain naming pattern.
>>>
>>> All catalogs in trunk kf5 with naming scheme "*desktop.po" but no desktop
>>> file:
>>>
>>> docmessages: kcontrol_desktop.po + plasma-desktop.po
>>>
>>> gui messages:
>>> kcm_kwindesktop.po, plasma_applet_org.kde.plasma.showdesktop.po,
>>> plasma_runner_plasma-desktop.po,  plasma_shell_org.kde.plasma.desktop.po
>>>
>>>>> (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.)
>>>>
>>>> Good point: this won't probably happen too much, but maybe we can define
>>>> a
>>>> custom prefix which is not going to conflict with normal use cases?
>>>> Maybe
>>>> <program>._desktop.po
>>>> <program>._json.po
>>>> ?
>>>
>>> What these catalogs (desktop, json, appdata, mimetypes) have in common is
>>> that they are generated by scripty for internal use only.
>>>
>>> We already have the suffix "_qt.po" to distinguish between Gettext and Qt
>>> translation system.
>>>
>>> Similar we could use a suffix like e.g. "_scripty.po" for the catalogs
>>> generated by scripty for internal usage.
>>>
>>> *_desktop_scripty.po
>>> *_json_scripty.po
>>> *_mimetypes_scripty.po
>>> *_appdata_scripty.po
>>> or a reverse naming scheme
>>
>> Using scripty as marker is a possible solution. I personally don't like too
>> 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" 
> catalog is good enough

Resurrecting this 2-years old thread because I think that the only blocker to
the rename is now fixed.

Any final opinion about the pattern?

Burkhard's proposal was:
*_desktop_scripty.po
*_json_scripty.po
*_mimetypes_scripty.po
*_appdata_scripty.po

I suspect that a dot is needed before the first _:
file._desktop_scripty.po

As I mentioned, I'd prefer to remove scripty and use a pattern like
foo._<type>_.po or foo.__<type>__.po.

What do you think?

Ciao
-- 
Luigi
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]