Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] l10n: add .gitattributes to simplify location filtering

>
> Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:
>
> >> +# Languages that strip both filenames and line numbers
> >> +bg.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +de.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +#es.po      filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +fr.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +#ga.po      filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +#ru.po      filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +sv.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +tr.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +uk.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +vi.po       filter=gettext-no-file-no-location
> >> +
> >> +# Languages that preserve filenames but strip line numbers
> >> +#ca.po      filter=gettext-no-location
> >> +id.po       filter=gettext-no-location
> >> +zh_CN.po    filter=gettext-no-location
> >> +zh_TW.po    filter=gettext-no-location
> >
> > How settled is the use of these two different filters (and names) in the
> > community of translators? I am asking because I'm about to align the
> > translation workflow in the Gitk repository with that in the Git
> > repository. I need to know which of the two variants of filter names I
> > should ask translators to use.
>
> I too am curious.
>
> I would imagine that the translation target langugae has nothing to
> do with the choice, and it would be mere personal preference---in
> which case it would be better if people can converge on a single
> convention fast and stick to it.  After all, even if the current
> French translators happen to prefer no-file no-location, for
> example, existing translators would graduate the project and new
> ones would come in, and their preference would change over time.
>
> At least comments like "Languages that strip" is misleading, if this
> is just "personal preferences of l10n groups of various languages".