Open Stack

Thanks for the input Duncan.

The removal of the debug logs is really a separate issue.  I was just
hoping to reduce the number of patches that would touch a large number
of files.  As we are thinking through this though, it really is a
separate change so it is best to do separate patches.

On a related note, we shouldn't be taking changes that have debug
messages translated if we are moving forward with removing translation
of debug messages.

Jay

On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 16:41 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote:
> That sounds like a sensible way forward, yes.
> 
> If the dependency is not need, then great, makes review and merge even easier.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> On 28 April 2014 17:03, Jay S. Bryant <jsbryant at electronicjungle.net> wrote:
> > Duncan,
> >
> > Thanks for the response.  Have some additional thoughts, in-line, below:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 12:15 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote:
> >> Two separate patches, or even two chains of separate patches, will
> >> make reviewing and more importantly (hopefully temporary) backouts
> >> easier. It will also reduce the number of merge conflicts, which are
> >> still likely to be substantial.
> >
> > True, I suppose we need to keep in mind the fact that we might want to
> > make this be easy to back-out in the future.  Hopefully it isn't an
> > issue this time around though.
> >
> >> There's no benefit at all to all of this being done in one patch, and
> >> substantial costs. Doing the conversion by sections seems like the way
> >> forward.
> >
> > So, let me propose a different process here.  Handling the i18n and
> > removal of debug separately instead.  First, propose one patch that will
> > add the explicit import of '_' to all files.  There will be a lot of
> > files touched, but they all will be 1 liners.  Then make the patch for
> > the re-enablement of lazy tanslation a second patch that is dependent
> > upon the first patch.
> >
> > Then handle removal of _() from DEBUG logs as a separate issue once the
> > one above has merged.  For that change do it in multiple patches divided
> > by section.  Make the sections be the top level directories under
> > cinder/ ?  Does that sound like a reasonable plan?
> >
> >>
> >> Doing both around the same time (maybe as dependant patches) seems reasonable
> >>
> >
> > As I think about it, I don't know that the debug translation removal
> > needs to be dependent, but we could work it out that way if you feel
> > that is important.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >> On 27 April 2014 00:20, Jay S. Bryant <jsbryant at electronicjungle.net> wrote:
> >> > All,
> >> >
> >> > I am looking for feedback on how to complete implementation of i18n
> >> > support for Cinder.  I need to open a new BluePrint for Juno as soon as
> >> > the cinder-specs process is available.  In the mean time I would like to
> >> > start working on this and need feedback on the scope I should undertake
> >> > with this.
> >> >
> >> > First, the majority of the code for i18n support went in with Icehouse.
> >> > There is just a small change that is needed to actually enable Lazy
> >> > Translation again.  I want to get this enabled as soon as possible to
> >> > get plenty of runtime on the code for Icehouse.
> >> >
> >> > The second change is to add an explicit export for '_' to all of our
> >> > files to be consistent with other projects. [1]  This is also the safer
> >> > way to implement i18n.  My plan is to integrate the change as part of
> >> > the i18n work.  Unfortunately this will touch many of the files in
> >> > Cinder.
> >> >
> >> > Given that fact, this brings me to the item I need feedback upon.  It
> >> > appears that Nova is moving forward with the plan to remove translation
> >> > of debug messages as there was a recent patch submitted to enable a
> >> > check for translated DEBUG messages.  Given that fact, would it be an
> >> > appropriate time, while adding the explicit import of '_' to also remove
> >> > translation of debug messages.  It is going to make the commit for
> >> > enabling Lazy Translation much bigger, but it would also take out
> >> > several work items that need to be addressed at once.  I am willing to
> >> > undertake the effort if I have support for the changes.
> >> >
> >> > Please let me know your thoughts.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!2]
> >> > Jay
> >> > (jungleboyj on freenode)
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1306275
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> 
>