Could someone please explain what's currently proposed in terms that
avoid terms like 'master' There are a lot of localizers who work on the
basis of 'I see a string, I translate it' who aren't necessarily
familiar with masters and branches and whatnots but since this will
affect localizers, this should be explained in simple terms. A lot of
the people I support off-list wouldn't be able to make that choice
knowing what they're getting themselves in for.
Or let me rephrase that as a question. Does the current proposal
- minimize retranslation work by not presenting localizer with hundreds
of retranslations when the English source goes from a formatted
something to an unformatted something or back again?
- present the localizers with stable strings i.e. strings which are
likely in their final form for use in the UI?
Sgrìobh Stanislav Horáček na leanas 12/12/2014 aig 11:45:
Keeping master updated always means more work and it is the reason why
I think that each team should decide if they want to use master or not.
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Workflow based on master · Christian Lohmaier
- Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Workflow based on master (continued)
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy