On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 22:20, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On mån, 2011-06-20 at 13:13 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Excerpts from Michael Meskes's message of lun jun 20 09:54:36 -0400 2011:
>> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 09:15:52AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > > Yep. Peter overrides them just before each release.
>> >
>> > Aren't there better ways to implement this, like git submodules? This
>> > redundancy seem awkward to me.
>>
>> There might be, but currently the translations are still using the CVS
>> machinery on pgfoundry. This stuff predates our move to Git. It's
>> possible that Peter already changed the msgstr in pgtranslation ...
>>
>> Peter is working on moving that CVS stuff to Git, but AFAIR it will
>> happen once 9.1 has released.
>
> A better way might be that translators simply work on a clone of the
> source repository, which is then merged (as in, git merge) at release
> time. There are some issues with that to figure out, but it sounds like
> the obviously right thing, from an interface point of view.
I don't think we want to track every single translation update as
commits in the main repository - we don't do that for non-translation
stuff... If it's a squash-merge, that's a different thing, of
course...
Other than that, yes, keeping translations in git branches seems like
a good interface.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
