Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
I have now committed a more extensive pluralization, but your case is
included
there.
As for the ru.po file, please see http://babel.postgresql.org/.
Great! I am translating 8.3 messages now. After this, i will go to HEAD.
ps:
By the way, when
Le lundi 30 mars 2009 à 15:21:38, Sergey Burladyan a écrit :
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
I have now committed a more extensive pluralization, but your case is
included there.
As for the ru.po file, please see http://babel.postgresql.org/.
Great! I am translating 8.3
On Saturday 21 March 2009 01:01:57 Sergey Burladyan wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Care to submit a patch?
this is it, i divide it into two, first is change source and second is
change ru.po file for psql.
I have now committed a more extensive pluralization, but
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Care to submit a patch?
this is it, i divide it into two, first is change source and second is change
ru.po file for psql.
changelog:
gettext-plural-test.patch
- check ngettext in configure (HAVE_NGETTEXT), show warning if not. must be
Sergey Burladyan eshkin...@gmail.com writes:
gettext-plural-ru-test.patch:
- correct translation for 1 rows message
hmmm... encoding is broken... i post it again in gzip
gettext-plural-ru-test.patch.gz
Description: gettext-plural-ru-test.patch
--
Sergey Burladyan
--
Sent via
If the (n rows) is the *only* message that needs it then I think it
would be simpler to just make it (Rows: n) instead. But I wouldn't
be surprised if there were other messages with similar issues.
--
greg
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
maybe build farm can help to test it ?
Yes, I think we should implement it and see what happens with the
buildfarm. If we stand still and do nothing, we won't be any wiser.
The buildfarm is
Greg Stark wrote:
If the (n rows) is the *only* message that needs it then I think it
would be simpler to just make it (Rows: n) instead. But I wouldn't
be surprised if there were other messages with similar issues.
There are a few more, e.g.,
%d index pages have been deleted
%d connections
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Greg Stark wrote:
If the (n rows) is the *only* message that needs it then I think it
would be simpler to just make it (Rows: n) instead. But I wouldn't
be surprised if there were other messages with similar issues.
There are a few more, e.g.,
%d
* Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net [090319 04:21]:
It depends also on what we *want* to target. I originally omitted the
plural support because it was a GNU extension, and I wanted to support
standard gettext implementations as well. (There was also a licensing
consideration.)
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
* Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net [090319 04:21]:
It depends also on what we *want* to target. I originally omitted the
plural support because it was a GNU extension, and I wanted to support
standard gettext implementations as well. (There was also a licensing
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Greg Stark wrote:
If the (n rows) is the *only* message that needs it then I think it
would be simpler to just make it (Rows: n) instead. But I wouldn't
be surprised if there were other messages with similar issues.
There are a few
Hi, all.
gnu gettext have support for correct plural form translation
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/Plural-forms.html),
but postgresql does not use it. why not ?
maybe it have some problem in some supported OS ? if not, can it implemented ?
maybe someone already doing this
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
Hi, all.
gnu gettext have support for correct plural form translation
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/Plural-forms.html),
but postgresql does not use it. why not ?
maybe it have some problem in some supported OS ? if not, can it implemented ?
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
Hi, all.
gnu gettext have support for correct plural form translation
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/Plural-forms.html),
but postgresql does not use it. why not ?
You don't need plural forms in this example.
On Wednesday 18 March 2009 11:21:03 Sergey Burladyan wrote:
gnu gettext have support for correct plural form translation
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/Plural-forms.html),
but postgresql does not use it. why not ?
maybe it have some problem in some supported OS ?
Yes,
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
gnu gettext have support for correct plural form translation
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/Plural-forms.html),
but postgresql does not use it. why not ?
maybe it have some problem in some
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Yes, the main reason is that it is not clear whether this is supported on
all
OS, or moreover that I believe it is not. So some allowances for that will
probably have to be made.
maybe build farm can help
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Yes, the main reason is that it is not clear whether this is supported on
all
OS, or moreover that I believe it is not. So some allowances for that
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Sergey Burladyan escribió:
maybe build farm can help to test it ?
Yes, I think we should implement it and see what happens with the
buildfarm. If we stand still and do nothing, we won't be any wiser.
The buildfarm is irrelevant to the fact
20 matches
Mail list logo
