Possible error in check_trans.pl

2004-08-01 Thread Rumen Krastev

Hello guys and girls (I hope there is ;-),
today I founded a strange behavior of purging script, that removes more than 
6 months outdated translations. One of my translations 
(bulgarian/News/index.wml) was purged from the repository, I wondered what 
happend and browsed the log - what a suprise: 


revision 1.4  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
date: 01 08 2004 10:00; author: peterk 

Automatic purge of file outdated for six months. 


revision 1.3  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
date: 01 08 2004 05:48; author: djpig 

Add missing translation header 


revision 1.2  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
date: 10 07 2004 12:46; author: rkrastev 

sync with v.1.25 


revision 1.1  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
date: 01 07 2004 23:28; author: kraai 

Update Bulgarian translation. 


*
As you can see my last update is from 10.07 (and after that there is a fix 
from djpig - thank you :-), furthermore the file was commited initialy on 1 
of july (this year)... 

I didn't dig into this perl script (I've not time, sorry), but probably 
there is some kind of bug, as you can see from the cvs log, so it will be 
usefull to fix this, before more people/translations be affected like like 
me. 


Regards:
Rumen Krasstev - coordinator of the bulgarian translation team



Re: Possible error in check_trans.pl

2004-08-01 Thread Luk Claes
On Sun, 1 Aug 2004, Rumen Krastev wrote:

 Hello guys and girls (I hope there is ;-),
 today I founded a strange behavior of purging script, that removes more than
 6 months outdated translations. One of my translations
 (bulgarian/News/index.wml) was purged from the repository, I wondered what
 happend and browsed the log - what a suprise:

 revision 1.4  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
 date: 01 08 2004 10:00; author: peterk

 Automatic purge of file outdated for six months.

v 1.1 is more than 6 months old (see below)

 revision 1.3  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
 date: 01 08 2004 05:48; author: djpig

 Add missing translation header

v 1.1 ??! and the previous upload was a sync with v 1.25 ??!

 revision 1.2  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
 date: 10 07 2004 12:46; author: rkrastev

 sync with v.1.25

 revision 1.1  [Select for revision A] [Select for revision B]
 date: 01 07 2004 23:28; author: kraai

 Update Bulgarian translation.

 *
 As you can see my last update is from 10.07 (and after that there is a fix
 from djpig - thank you :-), furthermore the file was commited initialy on 1
 of july (this year)...

The translation header should mention the translated English revision, so
it should have been 1.25 probably. As English revision 1.1 is more than 6
months old, the file would be completely outdated and as such is removed.
You can off course add it again.

 I didn't dig into this perl script (I've not time, sorry), but probably
 there is some kind of bug, as you can see from the cvs log, so it will be
 usefull to fix this, before more people/translations be affected like like
 me.

So, I don't think there is a bug in the script...

Cheers

Luk



Possible error in check_trans.pl (fwd)

2004-08-01 Thread Rumen Krastev




--Forwarded message --
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Rumen Krastev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Possible error in check_trans.pl
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:56:16 +0300
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 


The translation header should mention the translated English revision, so
it should have been 1.25 probably. As English revision 1.1 is more than 6
months old, the file would be completely outdated and as such is removed.


You mean that the script doesn't compare dates of the modifications, instead 
it reads the header and if the header says i'm v1.1 or there is no such 
header it decides that this file is outdate? Bizzare :-/
If it works like that, there is a bug for me - definitely. 


You can off course add it again.
Yeap, and what happens when one day this script purge 20 or even more files 
in different directories? This would decrease the motivation of every 
translator :-/ 


So, I don't think there is a bug in the script...
But I do 


Regards:
Rumen 



Re: Possible error in check_trans.pl

2004-08-01 Thread Luk Claes
On Sun, 1 Aug 2004, Rumen Krastev wrote:

  The translation header should mention the translated English revision, so
  it should have been 1.25 probably. As English revision 1.1 is more than 6
  months old, the file would be completely outdated and as such is removed.

 You mean that the script doesn't compare dates of the modifications, instead
 it reads the header and if the header says i'm v1.1 or there is no such
 header it decides that this file is outdate? Bizzare :-/
 If it works like that, there is a bug for me - definitely.

No, it compares dates, but in your case djpig added a translation header
saying that you translated revision 1.1 and that revision is way older
than 6 months so irrespective of how old your translation is, this
translation would be very outdated and so it was deleted. The only problem
was thus that the revision number was 1.1 instead of 1.25.

  You can off course add it again.
 Yeap, and what happens when one day this script purge 20 or even more files
 in different directories? This would decrease the motivation of every
 translator :-/

You should add a translation header in every translated file with the
right revision number (that of the english page of course).

  So, I don't think there is a bug in the script...
 But I do

Still??

Cheers

Luk



Re: Possible error in check_trans.pl

2004-08-01 Thread Rumen Krastev
Luk Claes writes: 

On Sun, 1 Aug 2004, Rumen Krastev wrote: 


 The translation header should mention the translated English revision, so
 it should have been 1.25 probably. As English revision 1.1 is more than 6
 months old, the file would be completely outdated and as such is removed. 


You mean that the script doesn't compare dates of the modifications, instead
it reads the header and if the header says i'm v1.1 or there is no such
header it decides that this file is outdate? Bizzare :-/
If it works like that, there is a bug for me - definitely.


No, it compares dates, but in your case djpig added a translation header
saying that you translated revision 1.1 and that revision is way older
than 6 months so irrespective of how old your translation is, this
translation would be very outdated and so it was deleted. The only problem
was thus that the revision number was 1.1 instead of 1.25.
Ahaa, I catch it.. 


 You can off course add it again.
Yeap, and what happens when one day this script purge 20 or even more files
in different directories? This would decrease the motivation of every
translator :-/


You should add a translation header in every translated file with the
right revision number (that of the english page of course).
Right :-/ 


 So, I don't think there is a bug in the script...
But I do


Still??
No, I don't... but this destructive behavior of the script can produce many 
human conflicts :-/ At least it should send mail, about it's intentions, 
right? 


Regards
Rumen 



Re: Possible error in check_trans.pl

2004-08-01 Thread Peter Karlsson
Rumen Krastev:

 No, I don't... but this destructive behavior of the script can
 produce many human conflicts :-/ At least it should send mail, about
 it's intentions,

I don't like mass-spamming people with autogenerated mail. However,
current information about what is happening with the translations can
be seen at http://people.debian.org/~peterk/outdated/

I probably should add a note to the website docs about this somewhere,
I just haven't got around to yet.

Please note that having proper translation-check headers is a
*requirement* for all translations on the website (that includes pages
where the English version is a translation, it should then refer to the
original language and its revision).

-- 
\\//
Peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
  I do not read or respond to mail with HTML attachments.



Re: Possible error in check_trans.pl (fwd)

2004-08-01 Thread Peter Karlsson
Rumen Krastev:

 You mean that the script doesn't compare dates of the modifications,
 instead it reads the header and if the header says i'm v1.1 or there
 is no such header it decides that this file is outdate? Bizzare :-/

That's exactly what it does, because that's the only proper way to do
it. Modification aren't uninteresting. The translation-check header is
the only valid data point.

 Yeap, and what happens when one day this script purge 20 or even more
 files in different directories? This would decrease the motivation of
 every translator :-/ 

It decreases the motivation of our *readers* if they are served with
outdated pages. The readers are our top priority.

-- 
\\//
Peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
  I do not read or respond to mail with HTML attachments.