Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: Robert Hak: "RE: Reverse style"
• Previous message: edx: "RE: CVS Compile Error?"
• In reply to: Florian Mösch: "Re: .lang files"
• Next in thread: Paul Suade: "Re: .lang files"
• Reply: Paul Suade: "Re: .lang files"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Alright... I speak only for me. (Realize that I have generally taken on
the title of project asshole for most discussions)

Deal with it.

"Oh you didn't take my idea" Deal with it.
"I got a blind response" Deal with it.
"But I think my idea is better and he just shot me down" Deal with it
"*big boss* says so" Yup, deal with it.

You can call Bjorn whatever you like in your opinion. What I have seen is
a man willing to discuss other options on a project that _he_ started and
that _he_ is in control of.

Welcome to the Open Source world, and the country called Rockbox. Bjorn
is king high mucky muck.

"You've already got my well-thought objections before" Well post it again.
There my be those of us that have not seen it and would support you.

If you are going to act like a primadona, expect to have the king kick you
in the ass.

This _is_ his project. He shares it with us for the good of the project,
but have no mistake how is in charge.

So deal with it.

/Adi

On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Florian Mösch wrote:

> Ok, we've had some time to discuss and think things over, and now I really
> only want really well-thought objections with motivations why this language
> file format is bad:

You've already got my well-thought objections before. I told you precisely
why I would prefer using a standard format with exactly the same benefits
as your proprietary approch. I won't repeat it again.

> A single file for each language. Plain text.

Exactly what I was thinking of...

> Example:
> [...]
> o id would be the ID to use in the source when this string is wanted. The
> code should use str(id) to get the particular string.

gettext sources usually use something like
   #include "gettext.h"
and
   #define _( x ) gettext( x )
and in the sources something like
   printf( _("Hello World.\n") );
which is (I think so) very readable and very compact.
I like it more than
   printf( str(HELLO_WORLD) );
but this is only my opinion...

> o desc would be a volountary/optional description of the phrase

... which I think is not necessary if you use "speaking" IDs or use the
original string as ID and include a reference to the sources as a
comment in the language file. The reference to the source should not be
optional but mandatory.

> [...]
> The order of these keywords are important. They should only come in the order
> as stated above (to make writing scripts for this easier).

I really don't want to restart tis discussion .....

> I'll soon bring on my initial scripts and language files that follow this
> format.

.... as *big boss* (TM) seems to have made his decision. Sorry for my
complaints. But I'm still wondering why he sends "requests for comments"
if he doesn't like critics.

   Florian.

   ===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===
                    Robert E. Hak
            http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~rhak

       Rockbox: The Archos Firmware Replacement!
         FAQ: http://rockbox.haxx.se/docs/FAQ
   ===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===+===

"Are you always so positive about everything?"
"Consider the alternative."
        Steve Prefontain - "Without Limits"

• Next message: Robert Hak: "RE: Reverse style"
• Previous message: edx: "RE: CVS Compile Error?"
• In reply to: Florian Mösch: "Re: .lang files"
• Next in thread: Paul Suade: "Re: .lang files"
• Reply: Paul Suade: "Re: .lang files"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]