[Qgis-developer] [Qgis-community-team] translation: breaking ts file up in parts for transifex ?

[Richard Duivenvoorde]

On 16-02-14 11:46, Alexander Bruy wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think splitting will increase complexity both for devs and translators.
> Also IMO we still have number of unsolved problems with Transifex:
>  - irregular updates (now github and Transifex not in sync)
>  - losing old string versions when offline workflow used
>  - it is impossible to detect changes when offline workflow used, so
>    one should check every file for updates.
> 
> So, -1 from me to put GUI translation to Transifex.

Hi Alexander,

Your first point: "irregular updated of github and transifex": this is
by 'design/choice'. We make the translations in Transifex actually
canonical. We should not even put them in Github, only reason we once
and every while after a build (==pull from transifex) push to github is
to have some backup in case Transifex vanishes from earth.
For Documentation and Website, nobody should get .po files from Github.
If Application would come in Transifex, the same rule: you should NOT go
to Github and get it from there.
At Transifex, you can get the .ts file from their website (and thereby
locking the translation from the website for one day if you want).
You can then use Linguist to offline translate the ts file (you got from
transifex). After Linguist-translating you can upload that .ts file back
to transfex and it will be merged there.

Your second point: yes, you are right. You do not have the old string
stuff, in Linguist then. But Transifex is getting better and better, and
for example if we translate via transifex itself now, you get
Suggestions and History too. But we win and loose some
functionality/options.

Third point: yes, all responsibility is moved to online service then.
But as long as we do a push of the original english file(s) to transifex
every day or so, you can see there?

About your -1: personally I'm pretty neutral in this: I'm happy with
both. Only reason I'm testing and talking about it is because others ask
for it, and it seems pretty successfull for Documentation and Website.

Splitting indeed adds complexity, that is the reason I sent the mail :-)

But maybe PSC can make a stand for this, or we should do some voting in
community?

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde