Bug#773224: (preapproval) unblock: grub2/2.02~beta2-19
On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 20:15 +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 08:02:33PM +, Ian Campbell wrote: The main reason for asking for preapproval is I am trying to decide whether to also include a fix for #771249 which is an update to the upstream translations. Would that be acceptable or not? Tricky... how bad *are* the upstream translations? Is this just polish or are there some problems with them? FYI, I've uploaded -19 without this set of changes (see #773714). I'm still prepared to fix #771249 in another upload if it is deemed acceptable, so not closing this bug myself. Cheers, Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#773224: (preapproval) unblock: grub2/2.02~beta2-19
Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 08:02:33PM +, Ian Campbell wrote: The main reason for asking for preapproval is I am trying to decide whether to also include a fix for #771249 which is an update to the upstream translations. Would that be acceptable or not? Tricky... how bad *are* the upstream translations? Is this just polish or are there some problems with them? -- Jonathan Wiltshire j...@debian.org Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#773224: (preapproval) unblock: grub2/2.02~beta2-19
Le 17/12/2014 16:59, Ian Campbell a écrit : On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 20:15 +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 08:02:33PM +, Ian Campbell wrote: The main reason for asking for preapproval is I am trying to decide whether to also include a fix for #771249 which is an update to the upstream translations. Would that be acceptable or not? Tricky... how bad *are* the upstream translations? Is this just polish or are there some problems with them? The problem is they are incomplete and outdated: the upstream translation call happened after this version (2.02~beta2) was published, so all translations (as proposed in #771249) have been submitted upstream after this release. FWIW, the last patch proposed in #771249 was optimized WRT the size of the diff: $ diffstat update_po_files.patch b/po/nb.po | 6774 +++… po/LINGUAS |2 po/ca.po| 661 ++--- po/de.po| 594 ++--- po/es.po| 559 ++-- po/fi.po| 854 --- po/fr.po| 276 +- po/hu.po| 2482 ++--- po/id.po| 582 +++-- po/lt.po| 1497 ++--- po/nl.po| 660 ++--- po/pl.po| 637 ++--- po/pt_BR.po | 547 ++-- po/ru.po| 554 ++-- po/sv.po| 2732 +--- po/tr.po| 85 po/uk.po| 264 +- po/vi.po| 1003 18 files changed, 13573 insertions(+), 7190 deletions(-) https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=10;filename=update_po_files.patch.xz;att=1;bug=771249 Regards David signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#773224: (preapproval) unblock: grub2/2.02~beta2-19
On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 18:12 -0400, David Prévot wrote: Le 17/12/2014 16:59, Ian Campbell a écrit : On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 20:15 +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 08:02:33PM +, Ian Campbell wrote: The main reason for asking for preapproval is I am trying to decide whether to also include a fix for #771249 which is an update to the upstream translations. Would that be acceptable or not? Tricky... how bad *are* the upstream translations? Is this just polish or are there some problems with them? The problem is they are incomplete and outdated: the upstream translation call happened after this version (2.02~beta2) was published, so all translations (as proposed in #771249) have been submitted upstream after this release. Ah, I hadn't realised this. FWIW, the last patch proposed in #771249 was optimized WRT the size of the diff: How was this optimization done? My thinking was that it would be better for future updates to stick with the raw result of running linguas.sh, but making a decision on a cleaned up diffstat lacking all the noise would probably more helpful, so being able to rerun would be useful. I notice that my previous cleanup attempt should have included ??_??.po too, to reduce the noise from zh_CN.po, making the diffstat: ast.po | 11 ca.po| 619 ++ da.po| 28 de.po| 563 ++--- eo.po| 16 es.po| 524 ++--- fi.po| 778 +++ fr.po| 244 -- gl.po| 22 hu.po| 2429 +++ id.po| 278 +- it.po| 596 ++--- ja.po| 12 lt.po| 1493 +++--- nb.po| 6429 +++ nl.po| 629 ++ pa.po|9 pl.po| 590 ++--- pt_BR.po | 498 ++-- ru.po| 529 ++--- sl.po| 30 sv.po| 2658 +- tr.po| 38 uk.po| 232 -- vi.po| 955 - zh_CN.po | 18 zh_TW.po | 20 27 files changed, 12585 insertions(+), 7663 deletions(-) Which still differs from yours (includes a lot more translations for one thing, but that might just be time having passed and more translations being contributed) Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#773224: (preapproval) unblock: grub2/2.02~beta2-19
Hi, Le 17/12/2014 18:28, Ian Campbell a écrit : On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 18:12 -0400, David Prévot wrote: FWIW, the last patch proposed in #771249 was optimized WRT the size of the diff: How was this optimization done? The translation project uses msgmerge with the --previous flag, and uses --no-wrap, while the grub project doesn’t use these options, so the PO files have been rewraped (to mach the existing ones in the grub source): ”msgcat -o $po_file $po_file”, and the previous string cleaned up: “msgattrib --clear-previous -o $po_file $po_file”. Not sure I did much more, but I’m willing to look at the differences between your diff and the patch I’ve submitted to try and understand where they come from. Regards David signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#773224: (preapproval) unblock: grub2/2.02~beta2-19
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock d-i Version 2.02~beta2-18 (in Jessie, unblocked by #772959) added a new debconf template. A call for translations has been sent out which is has a deadline of the 21st, I'd like to upload -19 the translations in. Hopefully soon after. The main reason for asking for preapproval is I am trying to decide whether to also include a fix for #771249 which is an update to the upstream translations. Would that be acceptable or not? Full disclosure, as you can see in #771249 there is some packaging faff relating to the VCS but the eventual impact on the source package isn't so bad. If anything I'd be going with the master-po-tp.org solution described in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=771249#25 which is to move the active translations to po-tp.org rather than messing around with the baseline upstream branch as described earlier in the log.) A diff is below, ignoring the *.po files themselves, and files which are copied pristine from po=po-tp.org. I'm expecting the answer is no, but thought I would ask. I hope -19 will also contain the eventual fixes for #773004, #773092 (both issue arising from the new stuff in -18), but I wouldn't expect you to preapprove those without seeing them. (Just mentioning them for completeness) This would need a d-i ack, I've CC-d Kibi and set the tag Cheers, Ian. Diff based on contents of git+ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grub/grub.git This is just the bits associated with #771249. $ git diff -M origin/master origin/people/ijc/master-po-tp.org | filterdiff -p1 -x po-tp.org/\*.po | diffstat -p1 Makefile.am|2 Makefile.util.def |2 autogen.sh |4 configure.ac |2 debian/.git-dpm|4 debian/changelog |2 debian/clean |1 debian/patches/po-tp.org--create.patch |16773 +++ debian/patches/po-tp.org--orig.patch |169479 + debian/patches/po-tp.org--use.patch| 137 debian/patches/series |3 debian/rules |1 linguas.sh |8 po-tp.org/LINGUAS |1 po-tp.org/POTFILES-shell.in| 18 po-tp.org/POTFILES.in | 1262 po-tp.org/grub.pot | 6543 + tests/gettext_strings_test.in | 12 tests/util/grub-shell.in |2 19 files changed, 194238 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) unblock grub2/2.02~beta2-19 -- System Information: Debian Release: 8.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386, armhf, armel Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
