build of etch release-notes from svn, conflicts with sgml vs po: ro, pt, ru
Dear russian, portuguese and romanian l10n team,
During the build of etch release notes, it appears that some of your
translations are performered in the po files, some other in the SGML.
Please see below what you should perform to update the po file before
the SGML can be safely removed.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:13:26AM +0100, Jens Seidel wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:51:07PM -0800, Matt Kraai wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 09:10:01PM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
> > > The Etch build seems to be ok (at least the html part).
> > >
> > > In order to switch to the SVN source instead of old CVS on www-master:
> > > * svn co svn://svn.debian.org/svn/ddp/manuals/tags/release-notes/etch
> > > * modify the crontab in order to "svn up" instead of "cvs up"
> >
> > Done. Thanks for the instructions.
>
> Thanks. So it is probably OK to work in tags/ to fix remaining minor issues?
> Normally such work happens on a branch.
Anyway SVN doesn't make the difference between a tag and a
branch.
> But as work on the Etch version stopped there should indeed no problem
> with it.
As spotted by Rhonda, some sgml files are stored in the (etch) SVN
together with their po source, as a consequence :
$ svn status | grep -v ^?
M ro/release-notes.ro.sgml
M pt/release-notes.pt.sgml
M ru/release-notes.ru.sgml
Unfortunately, they cannot be removed straight away from the SVN,
because the translations are not consistent in PO and SGML :
Please see the diff between the SGML present on the SVN and the SGML
generated from the PO :
http://teubr.eu.org/~spaillar/debian/release-notes.etch.ro.sgml.diff
http://teubr.eu.org/~spaillar/debian/release-notes.etch.pt.sgml.diff
http://teubr.eu.org/~spaillar/debian/release-notes.etch.ru.sgml.diff
Then update the PO so that no translated string gets lost when the SGML
will be removed from the SVN.
The right place to change the po is :
svn://svn.debian.org/ddp/manuals/tags/release-notes/etch
Thanks in advance.
--
Simon Paillard
Reply to: