Re: strategy for dealing with new gettext po/ChangeLog editing

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Darin Adler <darin bentspoon com> writes:
> So, what's our strategy for dealing with this new version of gettext?
> I see a few options.
> 
> 	1) ignore the problem; people who don't hack their copy of
> gettext just have to be careful not to check in edited po/ChangeLog
> files
> 	2) update all the autogen scripts in our projects with some
> workaround that undoes the po/ChangeLog hack
> 	3) release a patched gettext for people who want to commit to gnome cvs
> 	4) start checking in gettextize'd code as the gettext
> maintainer suggests (there may be many repercussions to this, for
> example, we'd also have to check in xml-i18n-toolized code, since you
> have to re-gettextize to re-xml-i18n-toolize)
> 
> I am asking here, but I'm not just asking about GTK. Perhaps I should
> be asking on gnome-hackers? I'd like to get this squared away; it's
> the kind of thing that really irritates me.
> 

Long-term I think we need to get gettext fixed upstream, so I'd rather
not do anything long-term annoying like 4).

Havoc