From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:51:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] po/de.po: add German translation
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=D1+DQ=JXBrWmf142dqTPhQbSa0hw=j8TLrGVX@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C91FF90.6050902@web.de>

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:29, Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> wrote:
> Am 16.09.2010 13:09, schrieb Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason:
>> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:57, Jan Krüger <jk@jk.gs> wrote:
>>
>>> My main reason for not translating this one is that we have a command
>>> called "branch" and since people need to learn what it means anyway,
>>> and we're certainly not going to change the command names in different
>>> languages [...] "Markierung" doesn't come close at all to describing the same
>>> concept. Conflicts markers are "Markierungen"; tags are not.
>>> The command name reasoning applies here, too.
>>
>> FWIW we could translate the command names if we wanted to, but whether
>> to do that or not is something we'll have to look at in due time.
>
> Are you seriously thinking about translating the "git branch" command
> into "git zweig"???

I am. I don't think we should do it, I'm just saying we can.

    char *allowed_names[] = { "branch", _("branch"), NULL };

Right now we only talk to the user in their native language, but we
could extend that so that the user can also talk to us.

> Locale-specific batch files should be real fun ...

We'd only translate the porcelain commands, and document that using
the translated versions anywhere but interactively on the command-line
is a bad idea.

But to re-iterate, I'm not saying we should do it, just that it would
be easy to add it if we want to, and it would presumably be easier to
use a translated git in if we did this.