On Friday, 11 November 2016 10:43:35 AM AEDT Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez
Meyer wrote:
> Hi Dmitry! Please allow me to explain you why I'm downgrading the severity
> of this bug.
No worries. Thank you for explanation. I've bumped severity only due to
#823822 (quiterss' FTBFS on timeout due to 150+ min in lupdate)...
> On the other hand running lrelease at build time is actually a very
> nice idea.
Thanks for suggestion. I'll try to replace lupdate with lrelease...
> If somehow upstream needs to run lupdate *after* the tarballs or the git
> tag has been pushed then you can safely run it before packaging the source
> code. This is of course not nice, but upstream shouldn't be forcing you to
> do this in the first place.
I've introduced 'lupdate' as workaround for run-time segfaults in some
locales due to missing translations (as I recall). I know no indicators to
notice when 'lupdate' is necessary... If 'lrelease' is insufficient then it
may be preferable to run 'lupdate' on build-time as a precaution.
> So the tool is not used in it's right place and a workaround is available,
> thus downgrading the severity to important.
OK. Makes sense.
> Please note that I *do* acknowledge the bug.
Thank you. :)
> I have been looking at
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-27936[1]
> and a good test case could really serve well here.
QuiteRSS may be a good case...
--
Regards,
Dmitry Smirnov.
---
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the
results.
-- Winston Churchill
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.