Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Hi Martin,
can you please detail what issues does the current workflow cause to developers?
What is the proposed way to update the .pot file if translations were split off to a separate repo?
Personally, I'm working with the pot/po files, but I suspect I'm in the minority.
Regards, ~~helix84
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Martin Owens <doctormo@...5...> wrote:
Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-translator mailing list Inkscape-translator@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-translator
Hi Martin,
what kind of issues does it cause, and how would the pot and po files be kept updated then in their separate repo (preferably automatically on each commit)?
I personally don't care too much if it's a separate repo or not (e.g. Eduard and I have been using a dedicated github repo last time), as long as - when I'm building my own Inkscape version - I can easily pull in the necessary translation files, perhaps using a script or a specific option for cmake...
Using a dedicated service with a web interface would help pull in more contributors, I think. For myself, I'm happy with using lokalize and git, and to have the corresponding source files at hand - this is also better when you want to check what the translations look like, what they really refer to (and if they fit length-wise).
(I think there is currently no launchpad translations service in effect. Or is there?...)
Maren
Am 27.06.2017 um 16:01 schrieb Martin Owens:
Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-translator mailing list Inkscape-translator@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-translator
вівторок, 27-чер-2017 16:01:32 Martin Owens написано:
Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Hi,
Personally, I would like to have translations near the code to ease up the testing and reporting bugs. Sometimes, it is cumbersome to wait for the POT update when you can update it by yourself.
On the other hand, if it is such a great obstacle for developers the translations can be separated.
However, Rosetta is not the best way for translations though it can be used to make the developers life simpler. ;)
1. It cannot be used for sustainable translations (no fuzzy matching, bad searching capabilities, unstable work on big catalogs like the Inkscape's one)
2. It is hard to use it for uploading offline translations (the queue waiting is unbelivably long, from several hours to days).
Please consider some modern services (Weblate with git integration, Pootle, Zanata (can be used instantly on Red Hat servers), or even Transifex).
Best regards, Yuri Translator to Ukrainian
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Martin Owens wrote:
Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
Did it get sorted out why the .pot file is getting modified on each make? It didn't used to do that, so it seems the root of the problem is this.
I'll defer to translators but from a release perspective I've been given to understand that having the .pot and .po files with the source file is strongly preferred.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
There had been a discussion about using launchpad translations when we migrated to LP years ago, but what I recall was that the general consensus was that it was not desireable to use and unlikely to stimulate translation activity, so it was never formally adopted.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Keep me apprised of what decision was reached here, this will affect release management if it's changed...
Bryce
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-translator mailing list Inkscape-translator@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-translator
Thanks Bryce,
From what we can tell, the pot file is regenerated in-situe when
running make only sometimes. Mostly it doesn't, but then when certain files change, it does.
So if we want such a thing, we should decide if we want it in the general make command or not.
But the normal make probably shouldn't ever change the repository.
Martin,
On Sat, 2017-07-01 at 10:52 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Martin Owens wrote:
Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
Did it get sorted out why the .pot file is getting modified on each make? It didn't used to do that, so it seems the root of the problem is this.
I'll defer to translators but from a release perspective I've been given to understand that having the .pot and .po files with the source file is strongly preferred.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
There had been a discussion about using launchpad translations when we migrated to LP years ago, but what I recall was that the general consensus was that it was not desireable to use and unlikely to stimulate translation activity, so it was never formally adopted.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Keep me apprised of what decision was reached here, this will affect release management if it's changed...
Bryce
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-translator mailing list Inkscape-translator@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-translator
On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 10:13:59AM +0200, Martin Owens wrote:
Thanks Bryce,
From what we can tell, the pot file is regenerated in-situe when
running make only sometimes. Mostly it doesn't, but then when certain files change, it does.
So if we want such a thing, we should decide if we want it in the general make command or not.
But the normal make probably shouldn't ever change the repository.
What do the diffs look like when the .pot gets changed? Is there some autogenerating code that's triggering it? Or is pot depending on something volatile in the source code (e.g. the line number of some chunks in the code file? Or something else? Or could the pot be depending on something git-specific (i.e. did this change when we moved to git, and didn't do it with bzr for some reason?)
Bryce
Martin,
On Sat, 2017-07-01 at 10:52 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Martin Owens wrote:
Dear Translators,
I'm at the Inkscape Hackfest here in Paris and we were wondering if it would be good or bad to remove the pot file and po files from the master branch and separate them out into their own repository.
The pot file gets modified on each make, and it's causing some minor issues for developers. So the preference for developers is for removal.
Did it get sorted out why the .pot file is getting modified on each make? It didn't used to do that, so it seems the root of the problem is this.
I'll defer to translators but from a release perspective I've been given to understand that having the .pot and .po files with the source file is strongly preferred.
But this depends very heavily on HOW translations for inkscape are done. If they are done 'in-place' or if translators expect to use a service like launchpad translations which keeps track of everything.
There had been a discussion about using launchpad translations when we migrated to LP years ago, but what I recall was that the general consensus was that it was not desireable to use and unlikely to stimulate translation activity, so it was never formally adopted.
Please let us know what you would like us to do with pot and po files regarding development.
Keep me apprised of what decision was reached here, this will affect release management if it's changed...
Bryce
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-translator mailing list Inkscape-translator@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-translator
participants (5)
-
Bryce Harrington -
helix84 -
Maren Hachmann -
Martin Owens -
Yuri Chornoivan