Acknowledgement sent
to Guillem Jover <[email protected]>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Stuart Prescott <[email protected]>.
(Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:03:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: i18nspector: X-POFile-SpellExtra field currently needs to be duped
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:59:59 +0100
Package: i18nspector
Version: 0.8.1-1
Severity: normal
Hi!
The X-POFile-SpellExtra field, generated and parsed by POFileSpell
(from gettext-lint), currently needs to be present multiple times,
one per line. Merging all those fields into a single one, spanning
multiple lines makes POFileSpell unable to recognize it. So please
whitelist that field from the duped checks.
Thanks,
Guillem
Subject: Re: Bug#703841: i18nspector: X-POFile-SpellExtra field currently
needs to be duped
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:05:55 +0200
[With my upstream hat on:]
* Guillem Jover <[email protected]>, 2013-03-24, 16:59:
>The X-POFile-SpellExtra field, generated and parsed by POFileSpell
>(from gettext-lint), currently needs to be present multiple times, one
>per line. Merging all those fields into a single one, spanning multiple
>lines makes POFileSpell unable to recognize it. So please whitelist
>that field from the duped checks.
Now that I think of it, it's not obvious to me whether i18nspector
should be complaining about non-standard duplicated header fields at
all. Gettext documentation is silent about this topic as far as I can
tell. (And, in general, the header documentation is rather poor.) I
assumed that no duplicates are allowed probably because of Debian bias.
:)
One reason to keep emitting duplicate-header-field for non-standard
fields (including X-POFile-SpellExtra) is that there's existing software
that assumes that no duplicates exist. If you open a PO file with
polib[0], and than save it again, duplicates in your header are gone.
But then again, it might be it's a bug in polib; I don't know.
[0] http://polib.readthedocs.org/
--
Jakub Wilk
Subject: Re: Bug#703841: i18nspector: X-POFile-SpellExtra field currently
needs to be duped
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:50:53 +0200
* Guillem Jover <[email protected]>, 2013-03-24, 16:59:
>The X-POFile-SpellExtra field, generated and parsed by POFileSpell
>(from gettext-lint), currently needs to be present multiple times, one
>per line. Merging all those fields into a single one, spanning multiple
>lines makes POFileSpell unable to recognize it. So please whitelist
>that field from the duped checks.
This will be partially addressed in i18nspector 0.10 (hopefully to be
released over this weekend). duplicate-header-field has been downgraded
to minor/wild-guess (so it's an I: rather than scary E:), and there are
separate duplicate-header-field-$FIELD tags for the well-known header
fields:
https://bitbucket.org/jwilk/i18nspector/src/dc9f59be4584/data/tags?at=default#cl-135
--
Jakub Wilk
Acknowledgement sent
to Guillem Jover <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Stuart Prescott <[email protected]>.
(Sat, 15 Jun 2013 03:21:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: Bug#703841: i18nspector: X-POFile-SpellExtra field currently
needs to be duped
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 05:19:02 +0200
On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 02:50:53 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Guillem Jover <[email protected]>, 2013-03-24, 16:59:
> >The X-POFile-SpellExtra field, generated and parsed by POFileSpell
> >(from gettext-lint), currently needs to be present multiple times,
> >one per line. Merging all those fields into a single one, spanning
> >multiple lines makes POFileSpell unable to recognize it. So please
> >whitelist that field from the duped checks.
>
> This will be partially addressed in i18nspector 0.10 (hopefully to
> be released over this weekend). duplicate-header-field has been
> downgraded to minor/wild-guess (so it's an I: rather than scary E:),
> and there are separate duplicate-header-field-$FIELD tags for the
> well-known header fields:
>
> https://bitbucket.org/jwilk/i18nspector/src/dc9f59be4584/data/tags?at=default#cl-135
Ah! Very nice. I guess it will still be printed by default? If there
could be a way (a la lintian) to either not print some of these by
default and enable them on the command line, or print everything but
being able to disable some, ideally from a config file, that would be
perfect. I can file a separate wishlist if either of these seem fine
to you.
Thanks,
Guillem
Subject: Re: Bug#703841: i18nspector: X-POFile-SpellExtra field currently
needs to be duped
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:41:09 +0200
* Guillem Jover <[email protected]>, 2013-06-15, 05:19:
>>>The X-POFile-SpellExtra field, generated and parsed by POFileSpell
>>>(from gettext-lint), currently needs to be present multiple times,
>>>one per line. Merging all those fields into a single one, spanning
>>>multiple lines makes POFileSpell unable to recognize it. So please
>>>whitelist that field from the duped checks.
>>This will be partially addressed in i18nspector 0.10 (hopefully to be
>>released over this weekend). duplicate-header-field has been
>>downgraded to minor/wild-guess (so it's an I: rather than scary E:),
>>and there are separate duplicate-header-field-$FIELD tags for the
>>well-known header fields:
>>
>>https://bitbucket.org/jwilk/i18nspector/src/dc9f59be4584/data/tags?at=default#cl-135
>
>Ah! Very nice. I guess it will still be printed by default?
That's right.
>If there could be a way (a la lintian) to either not print some of
>these by default and enable them on the command line, or print
>everything but being able to disable some, ideally from a config file,
>that would be perfect.
Support for overrides is on my to-do list (and I added it here precisely
with this bug in mind). It won't be ready for 0.10, though.
>I can file a separate wishlist if either of these seem fine to you.
Feel free. :)
--
Jakub Wilk
Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General
Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained
from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.