From: Jiang Xin Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2026 11:16:44 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC] Introducing AI Agents to Git Localization Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 4:30 PM Michal Suchánek wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 10:06:58AM +0800, Jiang Xin wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 9:00 PM Michal Suchánek wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 12:58:05PM +0100, Peter Krefting wrote: > > > > 2026-02-04 10:31 skrev Jiang Xin: > > > > > > > > > Please try using AI coding tools to update translations in po/XX.po or > > > > > review historical translations, following the prompts below: > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > Please disable this altogether for the Swedish localization. "Translation" > > > > using stochastic parrots is not mature and just creates gibberish that takes > > > > more time to clean up than to do the translation from scratch manually. > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > a similar attempt was widely reported, eg. here: > > > https://linuxiac.com/ai-controversy-forces-end-of-mozilla-japanese-sumo-community/ > > > > > > As pointed out the availiability of the tools is not necessarily a > > > problem in itself. The problem in that particular case was that Mozilla > > > automatically applied the tools to existing translations, even > > > well-maintained ones. > > > > Thank you for the context—this is a good reminder that automation > > should never override community judgment. > > > > To be clear, using AI as a translation aid is entirely up to each > > contributor. In Git 2.53’s l10n cycle, I temporarily handled the > > Chinese translation (as the usual lead was unavailable), translated > > all new strings, and fixed many issues in older translations—both > > speed and quality were surprisingly good. > > > > As an l10n coordinator, I’ve long struggled with reviewing PRs: while > > git-po-helper catches technical errors, it can’t assess translation > > quality or detect irrelevant content like ads or political text. Here, > > AI can help flag such issues during review. > > That is really sad. 'ads or political text' sounds like something that > would be visible immediately if somebody looked at the change at all. > Which implies that you do not want to look at it, and have AI review > it. That is put AI in charge. That's not going to go well. Git supports 19 languages, 14 of which have received active updates in the past year. How am I supposed to perform semantic-level reviews for languages I'm not familiar with? In principle, I should trust all pull requests provided by team leaders, but having an AI-powered semantic-level code review available, especially for extreme scenarios or to assist contributors, isn't necessarily a bad idea.