[vlc-devel] [PATCH] Lua: new script Allocine (France)
Rafaël Carré
funman at videolan.org
Sun Feb 5 19:37:38 CET 2012
Le 2012-02-04 01:10, Rémi Denis-Courmont a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> On Friday 03 February 2012, Rafaël Carré wrote:
>> Le 2010-06-02 15:22, Jean-Philippe André a écrit :
>>> This extension is in French only.
>>
>> This seems to confuse people using non french locale as reported by a
>> brazilian translator on IRC.
>
> IMHO, extensions should not be in tarballs and binaries of VLC at all. Last
> time I tried, it was not particularly nice to use (as a French speaker). And
> anyway, official UI features are best implemented in the UI directly. Indeed, I
> do not remember the original synchronization and thread bugs in the extensions
> support ever getting fixed, so using Qt must be better.
>
> Besides, I do not see why this particular extension would deserve to be in
> vlc.git unless there were a partnership contract with Allociné, of which I am
> not aware.
I uploaded it to addons.videolan.org and removed it from vlc.git
(backported to 2.0 too).
I would like to do the same for the imdb extension but since it's in the
official untranslated language (english), I can wait a bit to get more
input.
>> Some work was done on translating http interfaces but I am not sure what
>> can be done for lua.
>
> Seriously, the PO files are big, really big, too big. (For the most part, this
> comes from the thousands of obscure options in the hundreds of plugins, but it
> also comes from lack of rationalization. Some day, someone ought to write a
> script to find similar but different translations to ease rationalization...)
>
> Anyway, covering extensions in the vlc text domain is a bad idea: it worses
> the problem. And in any case, it would never work for unofficial and/or external
> extensions. For external plugins, we already have a way to define a different
> (get)text domain. If we want to expose gettext to external LUA scripts, then
> that is needed in LUA too. I am however not convinced that gettext is the best
> choice to localize extensions. Exposing the ISO language code only and letting
> the extensions deal with localization all by themselves is probably simpler.
>
>> Querying the locale from .lua code and having the .lua scripts use the
>> translation if available?
>
>> That could duplicate translating effort since the translations would be
>> separate from .po though.
>
> This is unavoidable.
Is there intention to translate extensions from current extensions authors?
More information about the vlc-devel
mailing list