On 8 May 2012 00:16, Mathias Behrle <[email protected]> wrote: > * Betr.: " Re: [tryton-dev] About some issues faced during the last release > process" (Tue, 8 May 2012 00:45:55 +0200): > > > On 08/05/12 00:19 +0200, Mathias Behrle wrote: > > > * Betr.: " [tryton-dev] About some issues faced during the last release > > > process" (Mon, 7 May 2012 21:08:45 +0200): > > > > > > > I would like to report some issues I faced during the last release: > > > > > > > > - format of the po file > > > > Some have pushed files not generated by the tryton export which > means > > > > it was not wrapped correctly. > > > > This is wrong, we must generate files always the same way to > minimize > > > > the changeset diff. This is important when you search in the > history. > > > > (exception of the client which uses Babel). > > > > > > Of course, I am prefering minimzed changesets as well. > > > OTOH I see, that some contributors are assigning copyright to their > > > translations - something not provided so far by trytond itself. What's > your > > > idea of a common export interface? > > > > I don't know. I even don't know if it could be considered as an original > > work. > > I would like to have the same behavior on the client side than on the > > server but it is an hard work. > > > > > > - multiple commit on the same file > > > > During the translation window, translators must commit only once > the > > > > translation of a module. We don't need to have WIP in the > repository. > > > > The repository is not a tool to send WIP files. Again we must have > a > > > > clean history and try to reduce the number of changeset on a file. > > > > > > I don't agree. All the code is work in progress. I for my share try to > push > > > translations as early as I am able to do, thus enabling possible > testers to > > > also check the translation. And of course I am trying to minimize fixes > > > after the first push (in fact for 2.4 I only had to update one > translation > > > due to a fix pushed by upstream during string freeze), but a fix is a > > > fix ;), and it is the privilege of translators to push their fixes > during > > > string feeze. > > > > No, it is not the way we work on Tryton, remeber codereview, bug > > tracker, mailing list etc. > > Pushing stuff for testing is *wrong* and it is the best way to break > > stuffs. > > What's the difference between pushing code or translation? It is never > meant to > be changed, but if it has to be fixed... > > > If you want to share, share it somewhere else. > > Or lose contributors... > > > > > - translation outside the release window > > > > This is just WIP commits because the strings are not freezed so it > is > > > > not needed to run after them. > > > > If some translators find they don't have enough time (3-4 weeks) > > > > during the release window, they can start (or maintain) outside the > > > > main repository an up to date translation as far as it doesn't > trouble > > > > the history of the main repository. > > > > Also we can try to setup a transifex instance on tryton.org if it > is > > > > needed (need to be patched to remove GNU headers). > > > > > > Translation is development, the same way as code is. There has to be an > > > *easy* way to test translations. So far the only way is to push to the > > > repos. > > > > See above. > > See above. > > > I agree that changing strings for point releases is problematic, but I do think that we could make it easier to ensure the quality of the translations through the whole development cycle.
I can only translate to British ;), but if I can help in this process I will. -- Craig 'The first time any man's freedom is trodden on - we are all damaged.' Jean-Luc Picard () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ -- [email protected] mailing list
