From: Miguel <mi...@jm...> - 2005-09-27 17:18:04
|
> I understand that concern, and I share it. > That would be nice to keep it this way. > At the moment, I don't see how if we keep gettext tools. Actually, it turns out that gettext is installed by default on Fedora Linux (perhaps as part of the development tools) ... so that is probably good enough for me. > But I am not really ready to give on gettext, it's *very* helpful to > keep the translations uptodate I agree. It looks like 'gettext' is a standard tool ... so we should use = it. > Concerning Jmol application and applet, the current situation is that > gettext tools are only needed when : > 1) creating a new version of Jmol (otherwise the distribution doesn't > contain translations) OK > 2) keeping the translation files uptodate with the Java code > So, for most people, gettext tools are *not required*. > If need be, we could get rid of case 1) by adding generated messages > classes under CVS (not pretty). > Case 2) needs only to be done from time to time on 1 computer (since th= e > result is committed under CVS) OK, then that is fine. Q: Is there a gettext implementation under Windows? We just need to find out why others are having troubles. Q: Do you believe that other people can compile now without having proble= ms? Miguel |