[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 11:39:53AM +0200, Thomas wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 10:46:25AM +0200, Thomas wrote:
> > > > Hojtsy gábor wrote:
> > >
> > > > > >>I too think that this is not needed for translations. I can't think
> > > > > of
> > > > > >>any situation where I would use this. An En-version comment
> > > > > >>will be at least usable :))
> > > > > >Whenever I find out a partally translated file, I know at once
> > > > > >which version is was started from, without diff or reading the
> > > > > >whole file.
> > > > >
> > > > > You will now which French version it was. Where it helps you?
> > > >
> > > > You're right. I use a tag like (proposed by Jeroen I think)
> > > > <!-- up-to-date against phpdoc/en/chapters/security.xml:1.23 -->
> > > >
> > > > As soon as I have enough files with this tag, I'll write a simple script
> > > >
> > > > which shows me the priority (which file is farest behind) of "my" files.
> > > >
> > > > The more users in our language follow this, the more useful it will be
> > > > (but having a system and a common "living" it are different things :).
> > >
> > > I think it is useless. If someone translate a file, he or she should look
> > > for chances in the English cvs.php.net tree.
> >
> > this is in fact an "automated look into the en-cvs-tree" for more than just
> > one file.
>
> For the other languages it is useless, because we have to look into more
> revisions besides the last en revision. Most translated files are one or
> two years old.
Yes, exactly the changes from the one year old en-version to the actual
en-version. But I hope that you don't insinuate all the other tranlators the
behavior like some of the German ones :)
--Tom
