PING Re: [PATCH v12] Locales: Cyrillic -> ASCII transliteration [BZ #2872] ping for 2.30

[Egor Kobylkin]

On 04.03.19 23:11, Egor Kobylkin wrote:
> ping
> 
> On 14.02.19 17:48, Marko Myllynen wrote:
>> Hi Carlos, Mike, Rafal,
>>
>> It seems clear that you all are currently too busy to have a look at
>> this but would you have any estimate when you might be able to review
>> this so that we could consider merging?
>>
>> FWIW, I chatted with Egor off-list and we're on the same page wrt the
>> following, hopefully this gives you a bit off jump start for this
>> subject when you have time to dig deeper:
>>
>> 1) Built-in C locale doesn't read/use any translit_* files and it can't
>> have any fallback mechanisms and it only supports ASCII so using GOST
>> 7.79 System B in locale/C-translit.h.in (as per patch v12) would seem to
>> be the appropriate way to implement Cyrillic transliteration for the
>> built-in C locale (it adds some 8KB to the binary).
>>
>> 2) Other locales read/use translit_* files and with them fallbacks and
>> non-ASCII are possible so it would seem preferable to first try ISO 9 /
>> GOST 7.79 System A and only if that fails then use GOST 7.79 System B
>> (in which case the end result should match with the built-in C locale).
>> For this the translit_cyrillic file should be added (as per patch v9 +
>> changes mentioned in patches v10 and v12).
>>
>> 3) Individual locale files can then be updated to use translit_cyrillic
>> as appropriate (see patch v9) and language/national specific conventions
>> (e.g., SFS 4900 for fi_FI) can be applied on per-locale basis.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> On 04/02/2019 09.14, Egor Kobylkin wrote:
>>> Carlos,
>>> are you comfortable to pick this up again this month?
>>>
>>> I would really love to have a reliable action plan to get this committed
>>> for 2.30. Maybe cut out a subset that is undisputed and commit only that
>>> first. It looks kinda like an eternal moving target otherwise.
>>>
>>> for you reference:
>>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-01/msg00036.html
>>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-01/msg00040.html
>>>
>>> Bests,
>>> Egor Kobylkin
>>>
>>> On 09.01.19 21:03, Marko Myllynen wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 09/01/2019 02.46, Egor Kobylkin wrote:
>>>>> On 07.01.19 21:37, Marko Myllynen wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/01/2019 23.12, Egor Kobylkin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good catch! Should we maybe split this into two patches, one for 
>>>>>>> C and
>>>>>>> the other for "country" locales? They have different codes and
>>>>>>> functionality so it looks like it would be easier to keep focus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would probably make sense, the standard C/POSIX locale won't
>>>>>> support System A so it also narrows down solution alternatives 
>>>>>> with it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Country" locales in localedata/locales/ can then have the exact 
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>> translit table included or they can have any other flavor - I don't
>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>> a problem here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed, and since those files are not limited to ASCII, perhaps we
>>>>>> could
>>>>>> now reconsider the v9 approach for them, i.e., prefer System A if
>>>>>> possible, otherwise use System B / ASCII (just need to make sure that
>>>>>> the ASCII fall-back for them will match the built-in C ASCII rule)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy to hear the split seems to be a clear cut one.
>>>>> How about I rename the "[PATCH v12]...[BZ #2872]" to "[PATCH v1]...
>>>>> C/POSIX [BZ #2872]" and the "[PATCH v9]" gets its own bug-report
>>>>> (number) and title for clarity in communication?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure is a new BZ really needed for such an addition, perhaps a
>>>> NEWS entry might be more appropriate (with the full details 
>>>> explained in
>>>> the commit messages of course) but I'll leave this to others to decide.
>>>>
>>>>> This way it would probably be easier to have the decision making 
>>>>> process
>>>>> tied up for both patches (separately). We may want to get the v12 
>>>>> POSIX
>>>>> out of the door in 2.30 then and can take all the time we need to 
>>>>> set up
>>>>> the rules for "Countries" locales as you need them to be.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps Rafal or Carlos have better suggestions but I would think we
>>>> could have a patch series where the patch 1/3 adds the C/POSIX locale
>>>> part (that would be what you posted as v12), then patch 2/3 adds
>>>> translit_cyrillic (based on your v9 so supports ISO 9.1995 / GOST 7.79
>>>> System A and GOST 7.79 System B as a fall-back (which would match the
>>>> C/POSIX rules)), and finally the patch 3/3 updates locales to use
>>>> translit_cyrillic as appropriate. But as said, Rafal or Carlos may have
>>>> alternative suggestions so it might be best to wait for their feedback
>>>> before doing anything yet (it's unfortunate you've had to do so many
>>>> iterations around this already but I think we've all learned something
>>>> during the process and the end result will be more correct than any of
>>>> the earlier versions).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>
>>