Jed's changed its format, 'jed' format no longer compatible about po2json HOT 6 CLOSED

Thanks for getting in touch. I noticed they had changed their format with the 1.1.0 release last week, and I was wondering whether to make updates to it right away. Any recommendations? I do want to keep current, but there may be quite a number of people out there who rely on the pre-1.1.0 Jed format.

from po2json.

I think leaving 'jed' unchanged and adding 'jed1.1plus' or 'jed1.x' format
for the new version would be reasonable. Apparently I picked a bad week to
start using this library :P.

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Mike Edwards [email protected]
wrote:

Thanks for getting in touch. I noticed they had changed their format with
the 1.1.0 release last week, and I was wondering whether to make updates to
it right away. Any recommendations? I do want to keep current, but there
may be quite a number of people out there who rely on the pre-1.1.0 Jed
format.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#31 (comment).

Evan Moses
[email protected]

from po2json.

Yeah, I really like Jed, but I'm a little tweaked that they did this in what appears to be a minor version change :(

from po2json.

I introduced the change, I will want to fix it. I made sure not to break any apis, it should only be a matter of transformation.

Looking at it now ...

from po2json.

Hey @Sinewyk @emosesSfdc , po2json 0.4.0 brings in the new option. Let me know if there are any new or lingering issues

from po2json.

You should close this then, np for me.

from po2json.