[PATCH 3 of 3] check-po: test i18n/*.po

[Matt Mackall]

On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 08:02 -0400, timeless wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 2, 2013, Kevin Bullock <kbullock+mercurial at ringworld.org>
> wrote:
> > This output doesn't strike me as particularly meaningful. Why would we
> have it print stats instead of the actual warnings? Or, if these _are_ the
> errors/warnings, why don't they look as such?
> 
> There is a mode where it will spit out the identifiers, but many of them
> are multiple lines long. If I included the translation too (which is often
> many screens long), then you risk encoding/font pain in addition.
> 
> You can try the other mode and see if it is more valuable.
> 
> Since we're talking about errors, and everyone can get them because they
> are committed in the repository, a shorthand seemed reasonable - why bother
> wasting repository space on the long form of what is essentially BAD data.
> 
> I should have flagged the whole set as RFC. This was my first patch bomb in
> a long time.

This all looks very promising. I'd like to see us fix most of the errors
before baking the numbers into a test though. Let's get the tool in
early in the next cycle.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.