Re: RFC: i18n proposal

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 12:30:38PM -0400, Jeff Johnson wrote: 
> Sure, but I've never heard of uncat. There are other technical issues,
> such as reducing the size of the corpus (and the translation work involved)
> by consolidating common strings into single msgid's.
> 
> Or maybe there's some option to cat that I've missed?

I'm pretty sure the utilities that come with gettext can do this kind
of thing. (merge po files)

Unmerging is just a matter of scanning for msgid's found in a given
package, it should be trivial.
 
> I can/will discuss this process ad nauseum, but I am adamant (particularly
> if I have to do the work) in keeping i18n out of package headers.
> 
> I18n does not belong in package headers is my only non-negotiable stand.
> I'm quite willing to listen to any other approach.

Oh I could care less if it's in the headers or not ;-)

I just want it in the package somewhere, rather than having a "central
registry" package with all the translations. Packages should be
self-contained (well, other than dependencies, but I don't think
"Requires: specspo = X.Y" would go over well).

Havoc