Thread: Replication references
Hi! I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just today, and it's not the first time). I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or will that fsck things up for translators? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > Hi! > > I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony > support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. > I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony > replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than > "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it > causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just > today, and it's not the first time). > > I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or > will that fsck things up for translators? +1 It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine translation for a little while for those languages. If someone complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the problem ourselves. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. > > That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than > useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long > Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. > >> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >> today, and it's not the first time). >> >> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >> will that fsck things up for translators? > > +1 > > It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported > languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few > strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be > the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to > be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be > French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine > translation for a little while for those languages. If someone > complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the > problem ourselves. > So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the second option is very long - much much longer than anything else there, leading to a lot of wasted space. Comments? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Attachment
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. >> >> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than >> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long >> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >> >>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >>> today, and it's not the first time). >>> >>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >>> will that fsck things up for translators? >> >> +1 >> >> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported >> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few >> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be >> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to >> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be >> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the >> problem ourselves. >> > > So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs > "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the > second option is very long - much much longer than anything else > there, leading to a lot of wasted space. > > Comments? It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. >>> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >>> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >>>> today, and it's not the first time). >>>> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the >>> problem ourselves. >>> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. >> >> Comments? > > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > >>>> Hi! > >>>> > >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony > >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. > >>> > >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than > >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long > >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. > >>> > >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony > >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than > >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it > >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just > >>>> today, and it's not the first time). > >>>> > >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or > >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported > >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few > >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be > >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to > >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be > >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine > >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone > >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the > >>> problem ourselves. > >>> > >> > >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs > >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the > >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else > >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. > >> > >> Comments? > > > > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection > > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. > > Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D > > > > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. > > Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's not an issue. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> >>>> Hi! >> >>>> >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. >> >>> >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >> >>> >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time). >> >>>> >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? >> >>> >> >>> +1 >> >>> >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the >> >>> problem ourselves. >> >>> >> >> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. >> >> >> >> Comments? >> > >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. >> >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D >> >> >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. >> >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. >> > > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's > not an issue. Ok, applied. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:41 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > >> >>>> Hi! > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony > >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. > >> >>> > >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than > >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long > >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. > >> >>> > >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony > >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than > >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it > >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just > >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time). > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or > >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? > >> >>> > >> >>> +1 > >> >>> > >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported > >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few > >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be > >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to > >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be > >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine > >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone > >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the > >> >>> problem ourselves. > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs > >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the > >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else > >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. > >> >> > >> >> Comments? > >> > > >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection > >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. > >> > >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D > >> > >> > >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. > >> > >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. > >> > > > > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's > > not an issue. > > Ok, applied. > I thought this one would go also in 1.14 branch. Any reason why I don't see it there? forgot a push, Magnus? :) -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 19:10, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:41 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> >> >>>> Hi! >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >> >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than >> >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long >> >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >> >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >> >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >> >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >> >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >> >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> +1 >> >> >>> >> >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported >> >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few >> >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be >> >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to >> >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be >> >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >> >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >> >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the >> >> >>> problem ourselves. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs >> >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the >> >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else >> >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. >> >> >> >> >> >> Comments? >> >> > >> >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection >> >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. >> >> >> >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D >> >> >> >> >> >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. >> >> >> >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. >> >> >> > >> > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's >> > not an issue. >> >> Ok, applied. >> > > I thought this one would go also in 1.14 branch. Any reason why I don't > see it there? forgot a push, Magnus? :) I wasn't planning to - do we really want to change the name of a node in a minor release? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Sunday, June 26, 2011, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 19:10, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:41 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>> > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>> >> >>>> Hi! >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >>> >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than >>> >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long >>> >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >>> >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >>> >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >>> >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >>> >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time). >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >>> >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> +1 >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported >>> >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few >>> >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be >>> >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to >>> >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be >>> >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >>> >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >>> >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the >>> >> >>> problem ourselves. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs >>> >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the >>> >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else >>> >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Comments? >>> >> > >>> >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection >>> >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. >>> >> >>> >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. >>> >> >>> >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. >>> >> >>> > >>> > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's >>> > not an issue. >>> >>> Ok, applied. >>> >> > I wasn't planning to - do we really want to change the name of a node > in a minor release? No, but weren't you trying to get it into 1.14? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 19:52, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Sunday, June 26, 2011, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 19:10, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:41 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>>> > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>>> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>> >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>>> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>>> >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> Hi! >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony >>>> >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it. >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than >>>> >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long >>>> >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony >>>> >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than >>>> >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it >>>> >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just >>>> >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time). >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or >>>> >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> +1 >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported >>>> >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few >>>> >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be >>>> >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to >>>> >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be >>>> >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >>>> >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >>>> >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the >>>> >> >>> problem ourselves. >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs >>>> >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the >>>> >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else >>>> >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> Comments? >>>> >> > >>>> >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection >>>> >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. >>>> >> >>>> >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though. >>>> >> >>>> >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything. >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's >>>> > not an issue. >>>> >>>> Ok, applied. >>>> >>> >> I wasn't planning to - do we really want to change the name of a node >> in a minor release? > > No, but weren't you trying to get it into 1.14? Oh. Crap. Yes. I need to pay more attention :O -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Hi,
I thought it should be "Slony Replication" in the tree, but the latest master-build show's: "Replication"?
Am I doing wrong, or is this wanted?
2011/6/26 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Oh. Crap. Yes.On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 19:52, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On Sunday, June 26, 2011, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 19:10, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:41 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>>>> > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>>>> >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>>> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>> Hi!
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the Slony
>>>> >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep it.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be less than
>>>> >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a long
>>>> >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be "slony
>>>> >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather than
>>>> >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without qualifying it
>>>> >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client just
>>>> >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time).
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for 1.14, or
>>>> >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators?
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> +1
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all supported
>>>> >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those few
>>>> >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for that to be
>>>> >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's likely to
>>>> >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly won't be
>>>> >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine
>>>> >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone
>>>> >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix the
>>>> >> >>> problem ourselves.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe dialogs
>>>> >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because the
>>>> >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything else
>>>> >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Comments?
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection
>>>> >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the translations though.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing anything.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so that's
>>>> > not an issue.
>>>>
>>>> Ok, applied.
>>>>
>>>
>> I wasn't planning to - do we really want to change the name of a node
>> in a minor release?
>
> No, but weren't you trying to get it into 1.14?
I need to pay more attention :OSent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Certainly works for me, so something is wrong for you. Did you rebuild? Could be a dependency miss o rsomething.. //magnus On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 21:25, Jasmin Dizdarevic <jasmin.dizdarevic@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I thought it should be "Slony Replication" in the tree, but the latest > master-build show's: "Replication"? > Am I doing wrong, or is this wanted? > > > 2011/6/26 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> >> >> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 19:52, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> > On Sunday, June 26, 2011, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 19:10, Guillaume Lelarge >> >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:41 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 00:07, Guillaume Lelarge >> >>>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> >>>> > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> >> >>>> >> wrote: >> >>>> >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Magnus Hagander >> >>>> >> > <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> >>>> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 23:45, Peter Geoghegan >> >>>> >> >> <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>> On 20 June 2011 21:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> >> >>>> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi! >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> I know we've had some discussions around what to do with the >> >>>> >> >>>> Slony >> >>>> >> >>>> support.. But it's there now, and IIRC the deal was we keep >> >>>> >> >>>> it. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>> That was the deal. FWIW, I consider our Slony support to be >> >>>> >> >>> less than >> >>>> >> >>> useless, in that it is basically a GUI analogue to writing a >> >>>> >> >>> long >> >>>> >> >>> Slonik script full of apparently redundant entries. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> I would, however, suggest that we rename it to actually be >> >>>> >> >>>> "slony >> >>>> >> >>>> replication" rather than "replication". Or "Use slony" rather >> >>>> >> >>>> than >> >>>> >> >>>> "Use replication". Calling it "replication" without >> >>>> >> >>>> qualifying it >> >>>> >> >>>> causes confusion to many users (came across it with a client >> >>>> >> >>>> just >> >>>> >> >>>> today, and it's not the first time). >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> I realize we're fairly close to release - is this doable for >> >>>> >> >>>> 1.14, or >> >>>> >> >>>> will that fsck things up for translators? >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>> +1 >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>> It isn't that hard to translate a few strings into all >> >>>> >> >>> supported >> >>>> >> >>> languages. If a translator isn't available to translate those >> >>>> >> >>> few >> >>>> >> >>> strings (and they'd have to not be answering any e-mail for >> >>>> >> >>> that to be >> >>>> >> >>> the case, and it will take them less than 5 minutes), that's >> >>>> >> >>> likely to >> >>>> >> >>> be in a language that isn't so widely spoken - it certainly >> >>>> >> >>> won't be >> >>>> >> >>> French or German. I'd be willing to live with a poor machine >> >>>> >> >>> translation for a little while for those languages. If someone >> >>>> >> >>> complains, the complaint is likely to be all we need to fix >> >>>> >> >>> the >> >>>> >> >>> problem ourselves. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> So, something like this. I went with calling the field inthe >> >>>> >> >> dialogs >> >>>> >> >> "Use Slony" rather than "Use Slony replication", simply because >> >>>> >> >> the >> >>>> >> >> second option is very long - much much longer than anything >> >>>> >> >> else >> >>>> >> >> there, leading to a lot of wasted space. >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> Comments? >> >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > It should be "Slony Replication" for the menu and the collection >> >>>> >> > factory name, not "Slony replication". Otherwise it seems OK. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> Agreed. Actually I thought I had fixed that already :D >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> > I would like to hear from Guillaume before breaking the >> >>>> >> > translations though. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> Yeah, I was planning to wait for his comment before committing >> >>>> >> anything. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> > >> >>>> > No problem with me. We have no updates to the translation yet, so >> >>>> > that's >> >>>> > not an issue. >> >>>> >> >>>> Ok, applied. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> I wasn't planning to - do we really want to change the name of a node >> >> in a minor release? >> > >> > No, but weren't you trying to get it into 1.14? >> >> Oh. Crap. Yes. >> >> I need to pay more attention :O >> >> >> -- >> Magnus Hagander >> Me: http://www.hagander.net/ >> Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ >> >> -- >> Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) >> To make changes to your subscription: >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers > > -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/