Re: [PATCH 1/3] localedata: use same comment_char/escape_char in these files

[Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress@gmail.com>]

I know that there are a number of glibc locales that I have
contributed that are not represented in CLDR.  Working with OLPC and
Sugar Labs as I do, we are often on the bleeding edge of supporting
new languages on GNUI/Linux-based  systems.

cjl

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:31 AM, Marko Myllynen <myllynen@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2016-03-10 00:24, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On 25 Feb 2016 15:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> ping this series ...
>>
>> ping some more ...
>
> I think the silence here underlines once again that we simply don't have
> enough "resources" in this area when a trivial change doesn't get a
> timely review even when the patch is straightforward. Meaning that if we
> want to keep the actual locale data in glibc in proper shape, using CLDR
> is the only realistic and sustainable way forward.
>
> Carlos and Florian exchanged few emails about CLDR/Unicode/glibc locale
> copyright status, was there still something to be clarified on that front?
>
> Mike's recent patch deprecated tel/fax fields in LC_IDENTIFICATION, are
> there anything else we should could / should deprecate or remove?
> (There's the PR https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14641 at
> least but it's still being discussed, not sure how to deal with that.)
>
> If/when those aspects are agreed upon, is there anything else or can we
> then start using Mike's script to sync from CLDR? Perhaps the situation
> with day abbreviations was left a bit open?
>
> Mike, do you have a gut feeling how complete coverage the current CLDR
> data provides per glibc locale, how many categories / keywords would
> still need to be maintained without input from CLDR?
>
> Oh, wrt the patch itself, LGTM.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Marko Myllynen