[Zope-CMF] [dev] some questions regarding CMF 1.4
26 Feb 2003 15:16:57 +0100
On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 10:08, Yuppie wrote:
> Florent Guillaume wrote:
> > As I mentionned somewhere, I'm against releasing the proposed i18n as it
> > is. Useable i18n means using message-ids everywhere, not just relying on
> > default-text-as-message-id which is brittle.
> > Note that I say releasing, of course the current work should be put in
> > CVS but it will need further work.
> I'm sure you've got much more experience with i18n than I. And the aim
> to have message-ids everywhere seems reasonable.
> If the current work is on a branch:
> - who will use it?
> - who will work on it?
> - who will keep that branch in sync with trunk changes?
I wasn't thinking of a branch, but HEAD. What I think should be done is:
- I agree with others that we should release 1.3.1 today or tomorrow as
it is, it works very well.
- Then do the work needed on HEAD for 1.4, and release that when
agreed-on features have been implemented, in a relatively short
timeframe (~1 month). The features have to be agreed upon
(architecturally), and there has to be people committed to do them (for
this I think it's mostly the case).
> Yes. i18n support could be improved. But it's already useable like it
> is. Right now there exist a lot of home-made solutions and keeping them
> in sync is much more work than keeping .po files in sync - even if a lot
> of message-ids will be changed.
Whatever is done will be an improvement. I'm just pointing out that the
path of least anguish for other developers will be to make a clean
release with standard msgids. If the existing version is released first,
then so be it, but it will mean a migration of .po file at some point.
Anyway we at Nuxeo are not using CMFDefault ZPT skins for any customer
project (obviously) so this has no direct impact on us.
Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France)
+33 1 40 33 79 87 http://nuxeo.com mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org