bug#25764: 26.0.50; Make some usability improvements to sieve-script management

[Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net>]

On 07/09/19 01:50 AM, Basil L. Contovounesios wrote:
> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>
>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>>
>>> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> I do use sieve! But I didn't write this code.
>
> I know, just thought I may as well fix these trivial instances upon
> seeing your patch.
>
>>>> Your proposed chances seem fine to me, though I'm wondering about
>>>> the use of `ngettext' -- I saw some arguments on these lists
>>>> recently about international/localization, and wasn't paying too
>>>> much attention, but didn't see a clear resolution.  Is it the
>>>> consensus that we're supposed to be using `ngettext' where possible?
>>>
>>> Oh, I didn't notice that part.  No, I don't think there's any such
>>> consensus...
>>
>> There are 23 uses of `ngettext' in the sources right now, which says to
>> me: "there's no consensus, but it's also not a problem".
>
> That's more or less my understanding as well:
>
> [45c525a685]: Fig grammar of count-lines-page
>   2019-06-09 17:00:05 -0700
>   https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?id=45c525a685041c274a26c70caed4088726a790de
>
> [7bba702e1a]: Use ngettext instead of dired-plural-s in Dired (bug#35287)
>   2019-05-05 22:43:27 +0300
>   https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?id=7bba702e1ad1ed343618e44cf5bbc2a1f079be0c
>
> I wasn't involved in the discussion, but IIRC l10n (i.e. using a no-op
> ngettext for now) is welcome and encouraged, it's just that we don't
> have an agreed upon or concrete implementation yet.  I think it's
> definitely better to mark the text as localisable now, while we're in
> the area, than leave the previous string formatting trick for future
> archaeologists to rediscover.  So I've now pushed my patch:

Okay, fair enough...