Merge commit 'intrigeri/po'

diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 69e197e37e8b39fe724884d0518a1e447e27a745..9f10c2913af9893c28c4924f1c8427559d0e28d7 100644 (file)
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ ikiwiki (3.1415926) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
   * Rebuild wikis on upgrade to this version to fix bloat caused
     by the dependency bug.
   * htmltidy: Print a warning message if tidy fails. Closes: #543722
+  * po: Fix name of translated toplevel index page. (intrigeri)
 
  -- Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>  Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:25:30 -0400
 

diff --git a/doc/plugins/po.mdwn b/doc/plugins/po.mdwn
index 65573b8775ed488635cecbfd9d9110128357afa2..f020adac2e587ed516d767018e08db445f4a213b 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/plugins/po.mdwn
+++ b/doc/plugins/po.mdwn
@@ -265,9 +265,20 @@ good reason for that to be done? --[[Joey]]
 > The commit 0113c69d4fb in my po branch might fix this. --[[intrigeri]]
 
 >> It may fix it in passing, but shouldn't it also be fixed for the other
->> `po_link_to` styles? (Also, if `mybestlink` is going to always 
->> just return `bestlink` in this case, there seems no reason to inject
->> it.) --[[Joey]]
+>> `po_link_to` styles?
+
+>>> Other `po_link_to` styles already work ok: say there is
+>>> a \[[dest]] link on a page called `dest`. When rendering
+>>> `dest.LL`, `mybestlink` returns `dest.LL`, and `htmllink` is then
+>>> able to detect, and manage correctly, that it is a self-link.
+>>> --[[intrigeri]]
+
+>> (Also, if `mybestlink` is going to always just return `bestlink` in
+>> this case, there seems no reason to inject it.) --[[Joey]]
+
+>>> Right. Commit cdc3576c8d1efb2 in my po branch prevents
+>>> `mybestlink` to be injected when `po_link_to` is
+>>> `default`. --[[intrigeri]]
 
 Language display order
 ----------------------
@@ -278,47 +289,6 @@ order, as `po_slave_languages` is a hash. It would need to be converted
 to an array to support this. (If twere done, twere best done quickly.)
 --[[Joey]] 
 
-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]] 
-
-Name of toplevel index page
----------------------------
-
-Normally at the top index page of a wiki, you see the wiki name at
-the top. However, at the top *translated* index page, you see something
-like "index.da". --[[Joey]]
-
-> I suggest changing `Render.pm`, line 115, to replace the `$page eq 'index'`
-> test with a predicate call such as isindexpage($page). Such a predicate
-> function could then be overriden by the po plugin. --[[intrigeri]]
-
->> Could do that, but if you have such a function it's natural to want to
->> use it elsewhere. Not clear to me it would make sense for po to override
->> such a function if it were used in some of the other places that compare
->> to index.
->> 
->> The other option would be for po to override the template setting.
->> --[[Joey]] 
-
 Pagespecs
 ---------
 

diff --git a/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn b/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn
index 1c3f0e752ee90b93d07cc68393ea87df87142bcf..ab822e76cca14c6bfd066bdb386791aa16c40285 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/doc/plugins/po/discussion.mdwn
@@ -699,3 +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]]