Re: Using Transifex in git.git

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 15, 2011, 20:40 UTC
Message-ID: <BANLkTin6SPDb8r1fjwWHVmh215esRo5+0Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DF74EEC.1050506@op5.se>

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 14:07, Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Historically, a translation for one language has been considered "one
> logical change" in that respect. I think it's safe to assume that if
> we want translators to stick around they shouldn't need to divide their
> changes on a per-message or per-command basis. Especially since such
> divisions wouldn't be very easy to do if all you've got to go on is
> a pot-file.

Then again, our policy with patches to the C code is that you should make make changes in small logical chunks with good commit messages, so that the people that come after you can make sense of what you did.

Translations are similar, why you chose to translate certain terms in certain ways could (and IMO should) be explained in commit messages.

I don't think it should be a per-command or per-message basis, just something like:

 * commit 1: start a XX.po file
 * commit 2: translate the word "branch", and explain why you picked
   that particular translation.
 * Translate similar messages etc.

Or do the whole thing in one big commit, but have a commit message that explains the choice of translations.