-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37.8k
doc: unify datacarriersize
warning with release notes
#33224
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
doc: unify datacarriersize
warning with release notes
#33224
Conversation
Unified the deprecation warning for the recently deprecated datacarrier[size] options to match the phrasing of release-notes-32406.md.
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. Code Coverage & BenchmarksFor details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/33224. ReviewsSee the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 2885bd0
Pr changes warning of datacarriersize
to a friendlier one. The friendlier text aligns also with the release notes.
Given that deprecation not always results in removal (in this project), I find this warning message a better representation of the reality.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
crACK 2885bd0
Good catch; the new message tone is more aligned and communicates the intention better.
ACK 2885bd0 The PR adjusts the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 2885bd0
Code review ACK 2885bd0. I don't think it is good for the release notes and the runtime warning message to say two different things. I'd also be happy if release notes were updated to match the runtime warning, instead of vice versa. Whatever is more accurate is better. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 2885bd0
Makes wording consistent with release notes (end of line):
bitcoin/doc/release-notes-32406.md
Line 1 in f5f853d
- `-datacarriersize` is increased to 100,000 which effectively uncaps the limit (as the maximum transaction size limit will be hit first). It can be overridden with -datacarriersize=83 to revert to the limit enforced in previous versions. Both `-datacarrier` and `-datacarriersize` options have been marked as deprecated and are expected to be removed in a future release. (#32406) |
ACK 2885bd0 Unless there's an explicit schedule for the removal (eg |
cc @hebasto; given this would change translations after translation string freeze. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 2885bd0
Will the src/qt/bitcoinstrings.cpp
file be changed in the GUI repository?
The translation workflow on Transifex includes marking translated strings as "Reviewed", which locks them from further changes. Not every translation team uses this feature, but those who do rely on it. Unfortunately, the "opensource" plan used by the Bitcoin organization on Transifex has very limited functionality, and it is not guaranteed that updating the translation source file (as in #33193) won’t reset the "Reviewed" status for other strings. In short, there must not be any translation source updates after the final translation string freeze. |
It makes no difference. |
@hebasto, how can we help with finding a solution? |
ACK 2885bd0 Makes sense to have consistent working with the release note |
Can we pay them some money to make that no longer a problem? |
I've done some experimenting with a test project on transifex to see what the actual effects this change would cause, and a potential workaround. In this test project, I copied over a couple fully translated languages to observe how the translated strings change when the source is updated. After rebasing this PR branch and doing However, I think there is a workaround to this issue. Ultimately the reason transifex thinks 121 additional strings need to be translated is because the If this doc change is desired by contributors, and the 9 acks suggested that it is, then I think this workaround of modifying |
Is this context info useful? Line numbers will change whenever some previous function in the file gets a non-trivial edit... Would it be better to add EDIT: https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_Localization seems to suggest |
I have added a tool which could be useful for making sure edits like this aren't problematic anymore - feedback is welcome on overall direction: #33270 |
I don't think line numbers is the problem. The actual source location of the string can change and the ids in the |
I have checked the problem against the actual Core translations on Transifex and I could reproduce the massive invalidations and #33270 (comment) does fix it successfully so that translators only need to check the modified entries: |
Was "Translation Memory Fillup" enabled then? |
... it can be accepted as is, but left untranslated until the version v31.0. This is acceptable because:
I still hesitant about introducing last-minute changes to the translation pipeline / framework. We can revisit all related suggestions, such as dropping locations and ids, right after branching off. |
Only if it is by default. I don't know where that setting is. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 2885bd0
Minute details like this in documentation improve the communication of the project.
The change is doc-only, minimal, well isolated.
ACK 2885bd0 |
Follow-up to #32406
The release notes claim
but the warning itself claims
To be less aggressive (since some have objected against this version online) - and to unify the deprecation warning with the release notes - I have changed the warning to communicate our expectation in a friendlier way.