Re: [PATCH 10/25] gettextize: git-merge basic messages

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 3, 2010, 17:51 UTC
Message-ID: <20100903175142.GA2341@burratino>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimBbSz5TF5CBa0us5oLQ-t=S9HNdBSVifUUSiqt@mail.gmail.com>

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> Those issues might be a bit hard, but I still can't really see how
> managing these files outside of git.git would make things easier.

The translationproject.org thing was a red herring. As you noticed, the relevant thing is "outside of git.git".

So imagine there is a git-translations.git project, perhaps. My only point was that versioning of translations and versioning of code can beneficially (in my opinion) be decoupled: with time, the translations for even _old_ versions of git improve, too.

> maybe we should just use
> msgmerge with --no-location.

That would partially alleviate my concerns, and I think we might be able to get the --add-location output back in actual checkouts with a "smudge" filter.

But still there is noise from reordering messages, adding them and removing them, and so on. It just never seemed like a great fit for the usual version control model to me.

> But I'd like to coordinate things on this mailing list

[...]

> without some external service being mandatory.

No objection here. :)

Of course, what is convenient for translators and maintainers (i.e., not me) takes precedence anyway; I am just throwing out ideas.

Thanks for your thoughtfulness.