X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/9ec492ccd1b14da240c3fb3460e285364e4e39ba..3ce8030dafc40a8188f6a32567c04d157b0ac39f:/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn diff --git a/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn b/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn index 6a7bb7f4b..ab822e76c 100644 --- a/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn +++ b/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn @@ -366,11 +366,13 @@ Any thoughts on this? >> basewiki, which seems like it should be pretty easy to do, and would be >> a great demo! --[[Joey]] >> ->>> I have a complete translation of basewiki into danish, and am working with +>>> I have a complete translation of basewiki into danish, available merged into +>>> ikiwiki at git://source.jones.dk/ikiwiki-upstream (branch underlay-da), and am working with >>> others on preparing one in german. For a complete translated user >>> experience, however, you will also need templates translated (there are a few ->>> translatable strings there too). My not-yet-merged po4a Markdown improvements ->>> (see [bug#530574](http://bugs.debian.org/530574)) correctly handles multiple +>>> translatable strings there too). My most recent po4a Markdown improvements +>>> adopted upstream but not yet in Debian (see +>>> [bug#530574](http://bugs.debian.org/530574)) correctly handles multiple >>> files in a single PO which might be relevant for template translation handling. >>> --[[JonasSmedegaard]] >> @@ -697,3 +699,28 @@ and via CGI, have been tested. * general test with `indexpages` enabled: **not OK** * general test with `po_link_to=default` with `userdirs` enabled: **OK** * general test with `po_link_to=default` with `userdirs` disabled: **OK** + +Duplicate %links ? +------------------ + +I notice code in the scan hook that seems to assume +that %links will accumulate duplicate links for a page. +That used to be so, but the bug was fixed. Does this mean +that po might be replacing the only link on a page, in error? +--[[Joey]] + +> It would replace it. The only problematic case is when another +> plugin has its own reasons, in its `scan` hook, to add a page +> that is already there to `$links{$page}`. This other plugin's +> effect might then be changed by po's `scan` hook... which could +> be either good (better overall l10n) or bad (break the other +> plugin's goal). --[[intrigeri]] + +>> Right.. well, the cases where links are added is very small. +>> Grepping for `add_link`, it's just done by link, camelcase, meta, and +>> tag. All of these are supposed to work just link regular links +>> so I'd think that is ok. We could probably remove the currently scary +>> comment about only wanting to change the first link. --[[Joey]] + +>>> Commit 3c2bffe21b91684 in my po branch does this. --[[intrigeri]] +>>>> Cherry-picked --[[Joey]]