On 07/23/2012 06:27 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
As a translator (for another project), I don't like Transifex and prefer to send good old Git pull requests. I understand a "traditional" workflow is hard to coordinate with others that use Transifex, but still I'd hate it if we became dependent on Tx.
For better or worse we are dependent on TX (Transifex). Fedora has adopted TX as it's translation tool, RHEL's translation tools integrate with TX (as well as other translation portals). And SSSD and IPA have made a a commitment to TX based on the direction of Fedora and RHEL.
Given that we've adopted TX I don't see the value in maintaining tools that support both TX and non-TX workflows. I'd rather see us delete the non-TX elements. If we have just one workflow it's easier to understand and maintain the code. If we ever decide we need to go back to a non-TX workflow we can always retrieve the deleted code from git.
-- John Dennis <jden...@redhat.com> Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/ _______________________________________________ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
