[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: translations (buildbot to update translatable strings)

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:38:50 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Foad [mailto:julianfoad_at_apache.org]
> Sent: maandag 13 maart 2017 11:53
> To: Stefan Kueng <tortoisesvn_at_gmail.com>
> Cc: Subversion Development <dev_at_subversion.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: translations (buildbot to update translatable strings)
> Stefan K, trying to help push this forward...
> We have consensus to do something about automatically providing updates
> to translatable strings. We need some help to fill in the details and
> actually do it.
> From my perspective, it looks like we should:
> * Instantiate a bot (buildbot) that will...
> - do we have a volunteer?
> * Check out the trunk (and any configured branches).
> * Run 'make po-update'.

If nobody else steps up, I can handle this part.

> * (?) Upload the updated 'subversion.pot' and/or '*.po' files
> to services including Pootle and Transifex.
> - how exactly should it upload to Pootle?
> - how exactly should it upload to Transifex?

Also willing to work on this part, after we have that info.

> * (?) Commit the updated 'subversion.pot' and/or '*.po' files.
> - which files? when (see below)?
> * Activate a Transifex.com account for Subversion.
> - how? can you do it?
> Re committing: I think we should rate-limit these commits to once per
> day, and should not commit when there are no real changes to the
> translatable strings but only changes in the source line number
> reference comments.
> An alternative to committing would be to upload these files to some
> place where translators can fetch them. Somewhere on apache.org and/or
> if the Pootle and/or Transifex services make these files easily
> available then that's fine, we can point at those, no need to commit.
> - Do they? What are the URLs?

I would start with this second scheme... Perhaps even add an option to one of our scripts to fetch the latest version at [build/invoke], for easy testing and committing around releases.

Not sure if we should really start auto commits on our tree...

Don't see a good use for these auto commits on trunk, as that code is seldom used in production...
And I would like to be careful with our release branches, on not creating too many unneeded commits that could be collapsed...

Received on 2017-03-13 12:39:02 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.