More robust i18n try4 #560
Conversation
We have received a few reports of broken ~/.i18n files Try to make the code more robust, using "with" to open the files, and remove redundancy in the code. Only write the file when set the languages, and flush to try avoid have a broken file. When read the languages, get the values from the enviroment variables set on bin/sugar. If the file ~/.i18n exists, was already read there.
When the user press the cancel button in the control panel section, the ModelWrapper object (in gui.py) try to revert the changes and write the initial values, even if nothing has changed. As the recording of the values is triggered by a timeout, we don't have another way to avoid race contions that verify at the moment of write the file.
…#4878 When the user press the (+) button and a new language row is added, the _add_row method receive locale_code=None. To make the method manage this case properly, we need do two changes: * Do not check in the available locales because None will not get any value. * When add the locale_code to self._country_codes, set the locale based in the default values displayed to the user. A consequence of the method not managing the None case, id that changes will not be saved until the user change the default value displayed to the user.
Instead of catch the exception in the model, do it in the view, and show feedback to the user with the mechanism provided by the control panel. Disable the check button and update the msg label.
|
Aside from my previous comment, I see changes on top of other changes (e.g, write method is changed in 3 different patches), shouldn't that be consolidated? Aside from these 2 things, the changes look good. |
|
@tchx84 , do you prefer consolidate all the patches in a single patch? |
|
@godiard no, just in a way where the same function doesn't get completely re-written 3 times :) |
|
Reviewed. I'm fine with the separate patches, as they show the sequence of change. Don't like consolidation, as it hides the sequence. Future bug analysis depends on sequence of change. |
|
Alright, we are tied now, so its up to @godiard. |
|
Ok, I merged this pr. Even when the method is modified in different patches, every patch have a specific purpose, and I have tried to consolidate the changes, and the result is too big. |
Replaces #558 addressing comments from @quozl.