Hi! [ Context: In bug 514106, there was some discussion about were to commit next translation updates from now on. ]
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 18:08:55 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Raphael Hertzog ([email protected]): > > Both branches. We're not going to resync lenny into master from now on > > as he explained in his last mail announcing the previous upload. > > Both? Yeah, to both branches, as long as... > Would l10n updates qualify for point releases? I doubt that, indeed. ... this would be fine, which I don't see why not, they have also been accepted during the lenny freeze, but I guess it would be best to ask the SRMs. > What I understand right now is that I should switch the reference > given to translators from lenny to master, from now. > > I propose picking PO files from lenny and merge them with PO files in master > (using gettext tools rather than git magic)....then switch the > pointers that translators have (D-I "level 5") to the master branch. master is currently up to date in relation to the lenny branch. But it's not, against the current sources, as we have been trying to avoid to update the pot files. Regarding switching the pointers for translators, we have been talking about doing some major cleanup of strings, in the C and perl code, to remove dupes, make them easier to translate, or more understandable, so I think it would be best if translators didn't target master for a while. But then we can always keep not updating the pot files until the strings have settled down a bit. So, Christian, I think it's fine to update the pointers from lenny to master, as long as the translators themselves do not update the pot files. Or do you see any problems with that? regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
