Rules/Languages/hu/definitions.yaml: add a new rule, based the english new definitions.yaml rule (the of word related)…

[hammera]

Hi @MartheGjelstad, @moritz-gross or @NSoiffer ,

I added a small modification with Rules/languages/hu/definitions.yaml file to pass Translator audit tool the file.
The change happened the of word handling related, basic with the new english definitions.yaml new rule.
The tests into the main branch are passed correctly my local system.
Future automatically saves the .yaml and .rs files any editor in Linux into the git tree with crlf line format? A committer doed a .editor config into the upstream repo main branch, and this change is synced my fork too when I doed the synchronization afternoon.
Why need to change to the crlf line format? More people developing the community in Windows platform?
Me not matter this line ending format, not problem in Linux to save the proper files this line ending format.

Attila

[github-actions]

Linux library size: 0.58 MiB (0.00%)

Revision	Release liblibmathcat.so
Base (a3de867)	0.58 MiB (605,800 bytes)
PR (a235b6a)	0.58 MiB (605,800 bytes)
Change	0 bytes (0.00%)

Built with default features, Rust 1.96.0, and Ubuntu 24.04. Workflow run.

[hammera]

Don't surprise, this small change related I choosed main branch, because the hu branch are not contains yet required other components to implement this new rule adding (hu branch last state in upstream I think is september 8 date).
So, now main branch destination in upstream level is more simpler this change related.

A question:
In translator audit tool, I see an interesting line with I don't no what means, previous in my hu branc I newer see this line with translator audit tool:
Rule order differs in SimpleSpeak_Rules.yaml: first difference at shared rule
position 12

Need handling this error? If need, how can possible doing the required change?

Attila

[moritz-gross]

This was added after the request in #619.
It only tells you if rules present in both languages have a different ordering.
If that is for a good reason, then you don't need to change it. If no, it might be easier to track if we have the same order in both.
Anyway, in most cases there shouldn't be any difference I think.

[moritz-gross]

regarding the CRLF/LF thing: I ran into the issue of Claude/Codex modifying the line endings, and as we use CRLF for (basically) all files anyway, I thought it'd make sense to set that as the standard. What do you think?

[hammera]

@moritz-gross, ok, I understanding now.
What file affected this line related into the shared folder? If need, I would like investigate this issue to easyest your maintenance work.
Me not problem the CRLF default. Usual I editing all rule files and test file with Pluma text editor (I not often using AI yet during development, if need using AI services, I using any provider the free plan, so not the agentic AI mode).
The locall modells is not enough fast my machine to using development with AI agents.
So, if need use Claude or Gemini my work, I using any services with free plan, or use for example my machine the Claude Desktop if need doing a more complex job.
When pluma open for example in Mate environment a CRLF saved file, fortunatelly saves the file with crlf format.
By the way, before I forget:
Do I need to perform a rebase and a force push to include the .gitattributes change you made on October 1st?
I’m referring to this commit:

commit e1692f01841ab6fcfeb0f8d879507d0f294fc6b0
Author: Moritz Groß <hi@mgross.dev>
Date:   Thu Oct 1 01:52:38 2026 +0200

    Normalize tracked files to match .gitattributes (#843)

I forgot a thing:
with my hu branch have a change with affects the definitions.yaml and navigate.yaml files with translation related (navigate.rs and definition.rs files are affected too the tests directory), with Neil final not merged to the main branch, because need he doed a selective merge to the hu branch with my mistake (previous I doed always with git fetch main, git rebase -i upstream/main to syncing the main branch).
This is the affected commits the hu branch, I am not sure what PR's are not merged to the main branch after the RC release (latest merge are happened to main with my pr's I think in august 16 with main git log output, after this date happened the RC release I think:

commit 4d3d73ee14b187b077acc40fe30bc2b9790fa1d7
Author: hammera <hammera@pickup.hu>
Date:   Tue Sep 8 00:54:48 2026 +0200

    Critical important if fits the RC cicle before next RC subrelease: I fixed few rules with definitions.yaml and navigate.yaml, and implemented navigate.rs hungarian tests (#753)
    
    * Rules/Languages/hu/definitions.yaml: fix some intent translations
    
    Signed-off-by: Attila Hammer <hammera@pickup.hu>
    
    * Rules/Languages/hu/navigate.yaml: Fix some navigation translation rules
    
    Signed-off-by: Attila Hammer <hammera@pickup.hu>
    
    * Added hungarian navigation tests, based with english tests
    
    Signed-off-by: Attila Hammer <hammera@pickup.hu>
    
    * src/canonicalize.rs, src/chemistry.rs, src/tts.rs: apply clippy fixes with latest stable Rust release related
    
    ---------
    
    Signed-off-by: Attila Hammer <hammera@pickup.hu>

commit 64110b6356236f5ec7f68a862e07cb9589b9f6f4
Author: hammera <hammera@pickup.hu>
Date:   Tue Aug 25 00:53:46 2026 +0200

    tests/Languages/hu/mtable.rs: add separator and row separator tests, based with english new tests (#699)

commit 0d869333b0dd0d3fa9b7e047dd94adfaa5e1a43f
Author: hammera <hammera@pickup.hu>
Date:   Mon Aug 17 07:43:02 2026 +0200

    Fix a mistake after the selective merge with definitions.yaml and definition.rs test file (#697)
    
    Signed-off-by: Attila Hammer <hammera@pickup.hu>

The clippy fixes related part are not need from the hu branch.
I try doing an unified diff to apply changes to the main branch, but because already changed main branch content with CRLF, lot of patch applying are rejected or failed.
In hu branch, when I ran cargo test languages::hu command, have 611 localization tests.
How can handle this situation?
Rebase is not good now I think to the main branch.
You have any ydea how can I merge two changes to main branch contains the 611 right hungarian tests and full actual hungarian localization with have the hu branch?
I don't no when will be a next release, so would like always to have main branch the actual right hungarian translation and test fixes too.

Attila

[hammera]

An interesting thing:
The Alert Translators on English File Changes workflow are failed my fork.
This workflow are need running with forks too?
Not only the upstream repo running this online workflow?

Attila

[moritz-gross]

An interesting thing: The Alert Translators on English File Changes workflow are failed my fork. This workflow are need running with forks too? Not only the upstream repo running this online workflow?

Attila

good point. not sure how this should be handled, but to me it makes sense to only run this on main repo.

[hammera]

@moritz-gross, have possibility to you do a force-push my fork to the latest main branch in main?
I tryed a rebase operation with github.com/daisy/mathcat repo main branch, but because not yet part of my fork your .gitatributes change, always I see following state, and rebase not complete:

On branch main
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/main'.

Changes not staged for commit:
  (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed)
  (use "git restore <file>..." to discard changes in working directory)
	modified:   Rules/Braille/CMU/unicode-full.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Braille/CMU/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Braille/Nemeth/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Braille/UEB/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Braille/Vietnam/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/en/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/es/unicode-full.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/es/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/fi/unicode-full.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/fi/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/hu/ClearSpeak_Rules.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/hu/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/nb/unicode-full.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/nb/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/ru/unicode.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/vi/unicode-full.yaml
	modified:   Rules/Languages/vi/unicode.yaml

I would like integrate to the main branch with from hu branch the missing september 8 merged changes (this changes are merged to the upstream hu branch only), this changes are not landed to the main branch final yet.
Because normal merge or rebase is too hard (possible results merge conflicts because the CRLF thing change happened in end of september), I was thinking I would simply copy the entire contents of the rules/language/hu directory (merged into the hu branch on September 8th) and the whole tests/Languages/hu folder—including the tests/Languages/hu.rs file—from that branch.
This way, the main branch would also contain all the changes that Neil and I had previously merged only into the hu upstream branch on September 8th, and for example I do a large Rule sync related commit, and a test sync related commit.
I can't think of a better way to synchronize the two branches regarding the Hungarian rules without having to deal with the hassle of resolving merge conflicts.
Naturally, I would only proceed with this change if you approve it beforehand; however, to sort out the CRLF line endings and ensure a clean Git status, I would definitely need the .gitattributes and .editorconfig changes you made on October 1st applied to both the main branch of my fork and the hu branch (at both the fork and upstream levels).
So, my fork, need not missing your doed october 1 doed changes in upstream both my fork main and hu branch, and upstream hu branch in Github.com/daisy/mathcat repo (the .gitattributes change and .editorconfig related change).

Attila

[moritz-gross]

Hi, ideally I'd like to avoid force-pushing anything in general. As I understand it, main is fine now, and I don't want to mess it up again on accident.
If you are missing some specific file, you can just download it from GitHub, and then place it where you need it in your repo, in that case the CRLF related ones.
That way of working is a bit ugly, but it works perfectly. Also there is git cherry-pick (see eg here), but I think that is not needed here.

[moritz-gross]

the state of this PR looks good to me.
It only contains rules relating to Hungarian, and the respective tests, as I see it.

If you think it's ready, I'll merge it into main @hammera

[hammera]

@moritz-gross, I am full ready this PR (I fixed all things with I wrote you in saturday evening), so me perfect if you merge this pr to the main branch.
You see right, only hungarian tests and rule files are affected. The „zoom in” style navigation tests the unwanted in suffixes I fixed with helps to Claude Desktop app (but I detailed proofreaded and tested all Claude suggested changes before I committed the proper changes). I asked Claude Desktop to look what possible fixing similar, founded the app few issues, so I applyed the other proofreaded suggestions too after proofread and detailed test. I don't no how can merging the Claude Desktop help inside the commit description (because I am not using Claude Code agent, so yesterday I not wrote the general co-authored by Claude noreply@github.com general form).
What we doing to the hu branch content in upstream level? After merging this PR to the main branch in upstream, should we merge the latest tested changes there as well into the hu branch, or should we stick to the main branch from now on—provided we are only editing Hungarian files and tests—so that we don't have to deal with merge conflicts at all?
There would likely be conflicts (this is just a guess) when merging with the hu branch (I didn't actually try this on the fork, as the content of the hu branch hasn't been updated in quite a while).
I squashing the lot of single commits with one large commit before merge? I’ve noticed that Neil tends to use the squash method rather than keeping lots of tiny commits when merging. Which method do you usually use before merging?

Attila

[moritz-gross]

I didn't really get the part on Claude Desktop and noreply@github.com.

Yes, I think using squash and merge makes sense in most cases, as a PR should represent one "unit of work" to work with. I don't think we have a policy on how to handle this, I'll try to remember to chat about this with Neil.

I think it is fine to just directly merge new "hu" changes into main.

[hammera]

Moritz, you are doing now the commit squashing before merge, or you would like to doing the squashing and I do a force-push operation?
If need me doing the squashing before merge, I need doing an interactive rebase my origin/main repo, marking the proper commits with squashing, and do a force-push operation before merge.

Attila

[hammera]

Oh no, I possible not will be have possibility do the commits squashing.
Because missing your doed october 1 change the .gitattributes file my fork, when I trying doing an interactive rebase command, I see following error, without really have me uncommitted changes:

root@hammera-pc:/usr/src/mathcat/hammera_mathcat/mathcat# git rebase -i origin/main
Created autostash: c21855cf
error: cannot rebase: You have unstaged changes.
error: Please commit or stash them.

Git stash not helping.
This modification are missing possible, but I not want committing my fork main branch yet, to not risking merge conflicting:

commit e1692f01841ab6fcfeb0f8d879507d0f294fc6b0
Author: Moritz Groß <hi@mgross.dev>
Date:   Thu Oct 1 01:52:38 2026 +0200

    Normalize tracked files to match .gitattributes (#843)

Enough to only apply this patch, not commit and trying the interactive rebase, or this is not a good solution your openion?

Attila