Re: [PATCH] Re-localise conflict prompt

Stefan Sperling wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 10:15:33AM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Mattias Engdegård <mattiase_at_bredband.net> writes:
>>
>> > The conflict prompt is no longer localised, probably because of an
>> > oversight.
[...]
>> Do we want the long options localised?  If I run
>>
>>     svn update --accept=mine-conflict
>>
>> the 'mine-conflict' is not localised.  I don't think we want the command
>> line and the prompt to be different.
>
> I agree. The menu options should mirror the --accept command line options.
> Unfortunately (or fortunately?) the command line cannot be translated.

Hi Stefan.

I assume you mean the command line is not translated as a matter of policy?  Technically I see no reason why it cannot be translated.  If the reason why we don't is so that scripts can be locale-independent, then it would still be possible to design a UI where the '--accept=X' takes a set of local-independent values for X (so that scripts can be locale-independent) and also a set of localized values for X (for command-line users).  I'm not saying we should do this, as that's something for the translators team and the rest of the development community to decide as a group and I'm sure it's been discussed and decided before, I just want to clarify what we're saying here.

In general I think the interactive parts should be localized as much as possible, and if that means we need to do something special to the command-line option processing to ensure the same options can be used both on the command line and interactively, then I think we should do whatever it takes.  But I will leave the decision about how much to localize to people such as Mattias and you who have experience of non-English usage (which I don't).

- Julian

> So I think it is OK to have short menu option names in English and provide
> long descriptions in the native language.
>
> Does that work for you, Mattias? Of course, if there is anything we're
> doing in the code that makes translation harder than necessary, we need
> to fix that. But in this particular case I believe there is nothing to fix.
Received on 2013-04-09 16:09:06 CEST