Re: New fr.po (with translated dispspecs)

> >--- fr-po.patch	2004-10-24 16:52:19.798069088 +0200
> >+++ fr-po.patched.patch	2004-10-24 16:54:17.702144944 +0200
> >@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@
> > +
> > +#: dispspecs/dispspec.xds.in.h:12 dispspecs/docbook.xds.in.h:93
> > +msgid "Metadata"
> >-+msgstr "Métadata"
> >++msgstr "Métadonnée"
> Yes, better
> 
> > +
> > +#: dispspecs/dispspec.xds.in.h:13 dispspecs/docbook.xds.in.h:95
> > +#: glade/cong-file-properties.glade.h:10 
> >src/cong-edit-preferences.c:149
> >@@ -182,11 +182,11 @@
> > +#: dispspecs/docbook.xds.in.h:11 
> >dispspecs/forrest-document.xds.in.h:2
> > +#: dispspecs/xhtml1-strict.xds.in.h:2
> > +msgid "Acronym"
> >-+msgstr "Acronyme"
> >++msgstr "Sigle ou acronyme"
> No, remember this is a menu, just a short word to give the sense.


So meanwhile we have 

- a patch
- a patch on the patch
- feedback on the patch of the patch

The first two are processable by computer, the thrid not.
But the information from the last one should be included.

A proposal is to recover this situation, are these steps.

*1: keep the 'patch' (no apply right now)
*2: edit the 'patch on the patch' with a text editor
 (drop unwanted modifications ( cut from @@ to @@ markers )
*3: send the new 'patch on the patch' to mailinglist.
*4: patch the 'patch' with the 'patch on the patch'
*5: apply the new 'patch'

I shall do steps 1, 4 and 5.  (no, no time for step 2 )


Geert Stappers

_______________________________________________
Conglomerate-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.copyleft.no/mailman/listinfo/conglomerate-devel

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBfPOJOSINbgwa/7sRApsiAKCY3pPyJfdSiW6PMSw54n6YYn0nRwCgsNO0
hTC4nz1dyCqzStgM7x2eA38=
=sMdQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----