From: Johan C. <jo...@oo...> - 2002-10-28 20:58:36
|
Hi Max & Anjo, I'm somewhat confused now. Although I do understand your discussion about Nonlocalized, I'm just not sure about what I should do in ERCalendar. To include Nonlocalized.lproj, or not to include Nonlocalized.lproj, that is the question. I believe that you both want me to have a Nonlocalized.lproj directory, but I'm not certain? It's no big deal to me, I can change back and forth in seconds. Johan Max Muller (10.20 -0800 2002-10-28) skrev: >That's fine with me, but knowing now that Nonlocalized.lproj is >somewhat Wonder specific we should think about in the future making >Nonlocalized 'deprecated'. For ERCalendar, fine with me to put >everything in Nonlocalized.lproj I just thought if it didn't need to >be in Nonlocalized.lproj then we wouldn't need to put it there. Anjo Krank (20.08 +0100 2002-10-28) skrev: >I still think that PBX should work according to the docs, not the >other way round. Also, it really made sense to me. However I think >until PBX is not really able to handle localized files correctly, we >should stay in the same structure for the existing frameworks. *If* >and when PBX is finally fixed - and I won't hold my breath - we can >think about converting the stuff back again. We could rework the >PBXUtil to move things one level higher when its name is >"Nonlocalized" or something. > >So Johan, feel free to check in like you planned. Sorry for the delay. |