On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Marc Espie <[email protected]> wrote: >> Then there are a number of /pt_BR/ in addition to /pt/. >> That looks suspicious, but i don't speak Portuguese, >> so it may or may not make sense, i don't really know. > > I don't think BR makes sense, but I'll let portuguese/brazillians chime in. >
Brazilian user chiming in: we understand Portuguese from Portugal just fine but some differences are quite evident to us, so we'd definitely prefer a local version when available. I grepped ports for man/pt_BR and found only three that also have man/pt, if I did it correctly: games/wesnoth: pt.po for manpages is much more complete and accurate than pt_BR.po. Even if pt_BR inherits translations from pt.po when no substitute is provided, some old translations seem just plain wrong. If it were only for the language differences, I'd prefer the BR variant as it sound more familiar. sysutils/deja-dup: there's a perl script to generate manpages from --help options, so I couldn't really compare them without installing the port. But judging from the .po files for the whole program, pt_BR seems much more complete to a point where pt alone wouldn't suffice, even for Portuguese users. x11/xfce4/terminal: there are some different words and spellings but in general everything is the same, except that only pt_BR mentions --color-table as a general option, as does man/C, so it's slightly more in sync if we're nitpicking. I'm not sure these examples help to decide on the proposed rule 5 for pt_BR, but I'd say that if upstream took the time to provide language variants of manpages, then users of those languages may benefit from them.
