Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CLDR-17063 CLDRModify -fQ debugging, real/fake keyword paths #3272

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

btangmu
Copy link
Member

@btangmu btangmu commented Sep 18, 2023

-This illustrates cause of draft=unconfirmed bug

-The old, fake keyword path is derived from tts path by removeAttribute

-The new, real keyword path gotten from the CLDRFile

-In general, they are not the same, common difference is draft unconfirmed

CLDR-17063

  • This PR completes the ticket.

ALLOW_MANY_COMMITS=true

-This illustrates cause of draft=unconfirmed bug

-The old, fake keyword path is derived from tts path by removeAttribute

-The new, real keyword path gotten from the CLDRFile

-In general, they are not the same, common difference is draft unconfirmed
-This illustrates cause of draft=unconfirmed bug

-The old, fake keyword path is derived from tts path by removeAttribute

-The new, real keyword path gotten from the CLDRFile

-In general, they are not the same, common difference is draft unconfirmed
@macchiati
Copy link
Member

good catch. I think we need a policy decision if the draft status of the two items are different, when adding the tts to the non-tts. Example:

tts=provisional // name
non-tts=contributed. // search keywords

Here is a strawman:

  • If there are no non-tts items, use the draft status of the tts for the non-tts when adding.
  • if there are non-tts items, leave the draft status of the non-tts alone when adding.

@btangmu
Copy link
Member Author

btangmu commented Sep 18, 2023

I'll await further input about a policy decision. In the meantime I'm implementing a fix to keep the original draft status for each path...

@btangmu btangmu closed this Sep 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants