pot/gmo packaging (G2 on Mac OSX)

[Christian Stimming]

Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Christian Stimming wrote:
> 
>>would strongly suggest that gnucash.pot should be packaged always. I'll
>>investigate how this can be enforced the cleanest way. Adding
>>po/gnucash.pot to the top-level Makefile.am EXTRA_DIST is clearly one
>>possibility, but not necessarily the best one.
> 
> Well, why would you try to enforce distributions shipping gnucash.pot in
> their *binary* packages? 

Huh? This thread was about "make dist", meaning that we have been 
talking about the source tarball. When talking about binary packages, 
then of course gnucash.pot is no longer necessary, as is all the rest of 
the source code. Maybe I shouldn't have said "packaging", but this 
discussion was really about our original source tarball and not about 
binary packages.

> I do think one'd want translators to at least
> use a recent release tarball rather than whatever their distro happens
> to contain.

Agreed - a binary/distro package doesn't need gnucash.pot and neither 
any other source code or .po files.

Christian