Re: Translation maintenance requires direct branch commits. (Doesn't it?)

[Lübbe Onken <l....@rac.de>]

Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> 
>>Several translation maintainers have mentioned this and I have promised to
>>write about it.  In this mail I'm trying to find out if I understand the
>>issue correctly.  Please feel free to comment.  (Or rather: please comment!
>>:-)
I decided to always work on branch and once 1.1 is out of the door to 
catch up on trunk afterwards. I found it quite annoying to fix/merge 
tiny spelling corrections twice.

> Interesting that you wrote this right after I decided to get the sv.po up
> to date on the branch. My strategy is to:
> a) run locale-gnu-po-update on the branch
That's what I do as well.

> b) go through sv.po on the branch and on trunk in parallell, fixing the
> messages that need fixing on trunk and commit trunk
I do that only on branch, so I'm working the other way round.

> c) Merge that to the po-updated branch, remove obsolete messages, resolve
> conflicts and commit.
I'll do that for trunk once 1.1 is through the door. I'm using poEdit to 
translate and I always refresh my translation memory after fixing 
translations on branch. This way I hope to get a lot of good matches 
when catching up on trunk.

Cheers
-Lübbe

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org