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

provide a all-dictionary quality assurence helper #11

Open
humenda opened this issue Jul 10, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

provide a all-dictionary quality assurence helper #11

humenda opened this issue Jul 10, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@humenda
Copy link
Member

humenda commented Jul 10, 2018

For mass-importing dictionaries, it would be helpful to provide a mechanism to do quality assurance over a whole set of dictionaries. There should be two flavours: one should just check and validate all dictionaries below the current directory, while another might use make need-update to fetch release-worthy dictionaries first.

The following needs to be done:

  • make qa: for programmatic usage, scripts should always output the same kind of error message format, i.e. "Warning:" and "Error:".

  • parallelisable way of running qa on all dictionaries + the possibility to agregate results

  • nice output like:

    50 dictionaries checked.
    Without issues: …
    Issues
    ------
    
    la1-la2: (multilineoutput)
    … and more of these dictionary issues
    

It is tempting to implement this in python, but it might be also desirable to have make qa as a make rule to benefit from Make's parallelism and for extensibility reasons.

@bansp
Copy link
Member

bansp commented Jan 6, 2021

This is a very good idea, not only for mass import, but simply to ensure coherence across so many databases, after any project-wide modification. Let me cross-reference my ticket from freedict/fd-dictionaries#64, because both these tickets seem to share a similar spirit.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants