Lübbe Onken wrote:
> The new way to create the pot file will be to profile the entire xml sources
> into one xsl file and then create the .pot file from there. The big
> advantage will be that the entries in the pot file (and the entries in the
> .po files) will be in the same order as in the docs and not in the order in
> which they are found in the file system. A possible disadvantage (if it's a
> disadvantage at all) will be that we have one .pot file per application,
> like TortoiseMerge.pot and TortoiseSVN.pot. I can merge these two into one
> doc.pot file again, but what do you and the other doc maintainers think
> about this?
>
> What is better:
> 1) one doc.pot and one .po file per language for the entire docs?
> 2) a .pot file and language .po file per application?
+1 for 2 ;-)
Having a separate .pot file for each application sounds like a positive
advantage to me.
>>Is there an easy way to include the buildtools dependency
>>from the level above?
>
> As a Korean customer said to me a few weeks ago "I don't understand prease
> exprain" :-)
velly well. The default.build at the top level (which builds everything)
calls toolpaths.build to set the paths to the tools (surprise)
including the doc tools. If I 'NAnt docs' from the top level, I get all
the docs (subject to my customization layer). If I just want to build
doc.pot, I have to go down a level into the docs folder and 'NAnt
potfile'. But if I do that, I miss out the dependency on
toolpaths.build. Does that make sense now?
Simon
--
___
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Mon Dec 19 11:42:38 2005