[RFC][PATCH v8 08/16] Let alternative month names be a copy of regular ones (bug 10871).

[Rafal Luzynski]

Hello,

It's time to get my hands dirty with this again:

4.07.2017 01:12 Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2017, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> > On 06/28/2017 06:05 AM, Rafal Luzynski wrote:
> > > If alt_mon definition is missing from a locale then let it be
> > > a copy of mon array. Majority of languages do not need this feature
> > > so let us accept the locale definition file without alt_mon and
> > > provide the same content as mon when software requires alt_mon.
> >
> > This seems a reasonable policy, but it should be documented.
>
> It's essentially *required* (by the fact that we suppose building locale
> definition sources that follow existing versions of POSIX, which won't use
> a feature that's only added in a bug tagged issue8, i.e. for the next
> major revision of POSIX), and putting any other text in there clearly be
> worse than copying mon. (It still makes sense to document this
> consequence of supporting existing POSIX versions, if there's somewhere
> suitable to document it.)

Zack, Joseph, please explain where should I document:

* that if alt_mon is missing from the locale definition file then its
  contents is copied from mon (and ab_alt_mon is copied from abmon as well)
* all other changes?

Regards,

Rafal