X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/9ec492ccd1b14da240c3fb3460e285364e4e39ba..bc4ef28f3ebc396096b7eccad04eea6febac8d38:/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn?ds=sidebyside

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]]