From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs i18n Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 11:22:12 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <0aa7dad2-39b7-2ba1-b4b8-f8db8928c8c0@cs.ucla.edu> References: <87o97aq6gz.fsf@jidanni.org> <83h8ckezyt.fsf@gnu.org> <83o96qegv1.fsf@gnu.org> <32b1ab1b-bef4-629a-8830-b1dcc6915087@cs.ucla.edu> <83a7iae9va.fsf@gnu.org> <05ed2dec-2a84-f7dc-1af5-c9d923992785@cs.ucla.edu> <87bm2p56gu.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <838sxrdgco.fsf@gnu.org> <83mum6bv11.fsf@gnu.org> <87zhq6nwsi.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8336nxbxfi.fsf@gnu.org> <2539FAB2-2D71-44F5-B8D9-2C4AFE52ACEC@gmail.com> <83wol986to.fsf@gnu.org> <75275F9B-D257-4C9E-85A0-A7F57C93FD64@gmail.com> <83mum48s9t.fsf@gnu.org> <87ef7gbg08.fsf@gmx.de> <83h8cc8gy6.fsf@gnu.org> <875zssb853.fsf@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="42719"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1 Cc: brandelune@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Albinus , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 09 20:22:25 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h2hY9-000Axf-8G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Mar 2019 20:22:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34586 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2hY8-0005e4-8e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Mar 2019 14:22:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33356) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2hY2-0005dk-AY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Mar 2019 14:22:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2hY1-00016S-IV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Mar 2019 14:22:18 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:39564) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2hXz-00013E-DG; Sat, 09 Mar 2019 14:22:15 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F101016154E; Sat, 9 Mar 2019 11:22:13 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id XiWDFh9w8Km0; Sat, 9 Mar 2019 11:22:12 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4ED3161556; Sat, 9 Mar 2019 11:22:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id hcBxQmQoiYvL; Sat, 9 Mar 2019 11:22:12 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-23-242-74-103.socal.res.rr.com [23.242.74.103]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A43B161541; Sat, 9 Mar 2019 11:22:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <875zssb853.fsf@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:233986 Archived-At: Michael Albinus wrote: > Packages with an own subdirectory (f.e., gnus, vc) should have an own > catalog. I'm not sure I agree. Message catalogs are primarily of interest to translators and installers, not programmers. Assuming we're using the gettext machinery (a pretty safe assumption, as why reinvent the wheel?), the set of messages to be translated will be maintained automatically: programmers shouldn't care how many catalogs there are, or how they're updated. Other GNU packages generally go with one large catalog, for several reasons. For example, translators can batch their work; similar translations can be shared more easily and reliably; and installation is simpler and a bit faster. A few packages do have multiple catalogs. This is intended for convenience in installation, not for convenience to developers. For example, GNU gettext has two catalogs, one for the gettext runtime library (used by applications in production) and one for gettext tools (used by developers when extracting or doing translations). That way, operating systems packagers can install just the first message catalog on systems where users are not developers. In practice, though, this multiple-catalog approach hasn't proved to be all that useful. Debian and Fedora both put the two gettext catalogs into one package. Debian has a package language-pack-fr-base that contains French translations for several core packages, including both gettext catalogs, and similarly for other languages. Fedora includes all translations of both gettext catalogs in its 'gettext' package. So in hindsight, it seems to have been overkill for 'gettext' to have two translation catalogs. With this in mind, I think it unlikely that OS packagers would find it useful for Emacs to maintain multiple message catalogs for each source subdirectory.