Xavier, First of all, I will sent the actual my proposal later to share with you. I think we will want to adjust setting for the TEST(etoys) project on Pootle to validate if it works for us actually and need your help, please.
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
I would take out tinlizzie - both our master git and svn repositories are at laptop.org. tinlizzie is only for internal use and backup.
This was just my misunderstanding and I will revise it.
Takashi Yamamiya tak@metatoys.org wrote:
Why should we split repository? Because version and quality management will be easier; community
can work easily.
I wonder if "quality management" actually works because we don't
understand
all language. But it is worth to try.
Yep. At least release we as developers can verify PO by comparing, compiling, that is what I meant as QA. I suspect many people of translation community have even gettext tools.
Xavier Alvarez xavi.alvarez@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday 30 November 2007 16:09, Bert Freudenberg wrote: ...snip... BF> Does pootle really force some directory structure onto BF> projects?
By default Pootle uses the following layout (xx_YY being the language code): .../project/ .../project/xx_YY/xyzzy.po .../project/templates/xyzzy.pot
But it can also handle GNU's all-in-one structure: .../project/po/ .../project/po/xyzzy.pot .../project/po/xx_YY.po
When I tested, I experienced such error on uploading that file name doesn't confrm to GNU style. So I had to change etoys_test.po to ja_ZZ. po. Was this because of Pootle's settings? can the rule be relaxed even in GNU style setting?
In the former style we can split huge etoys.po into smaller pieces or can register additional POs for addons without big change when we want. (I assume Bert want to split it... ) In the later style we can't. With the restriction I would choose the former even if we don't need to right now.
Cheers, /Korakurider -------------------------------------- New Design Yahoo! JAPAN 2008/01/01 http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/newdesign/