Re: I18N: automatic determination of potfiles list

["Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>]

On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> 2) As part of the release cycle, there needs to be a rule about when
>    we stop changing error messages, so that translations are not
>    perpetually out of date.  I think at the "bugfixes only" cut-off
>    makes the most sense.

Error messages can have bugs, and we should continue to fix those.

> 2) Which .pot file should be uploaded to the translation project?  I
>    don't think they have a protocol for maintaining multiple versions
>    of the same file, but we need that (3.0 error messages are
>    different to 3.1, will be different to 3.2, etc)

They certainly seem to have both gcc-2.96.20000615.pot and gcc-3.0.pot at
present.  The problem is how to register that, while both gcc-3.1.pot and
gcc-3.2.20020415.pot would be worth translating, once gcc-3.1.1.pot is
there gcc-3.1.pot is irrelevant.

I don't know how functional the translation machinery in 3.0.x is, but
quite possibly we should declare that 3.1 is the first version for which
we properly support translation, upload the current gcc.pot file, declare
the previous ones obsolete, and install translations in CVS as they
appear.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk