Re: [translations] Git translation branch policy change: merge with and from stable/2.16

[Jean-Charles Malahieude <lilyfan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Le 20/10/2012 20:33, Francisco Vila disait :
> 2012/10/20 David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx>:
> > If it is ok with people, I'd propose the following course in order to
> > get the ball rolling again:
> >
> > I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation.  That should be unproblematic.
> > Then I'll merge translation into staging.  This will require a bit of
> > cleanup and conflict resolution.
>
> The only problems I foresee, will come from original English docs. As
> we have not translated anything new since the fork, all translated
> material is directly dumpable there. Not blindly, though, you know
> what I mean.

I think you mean all @lilypond that might have changed in-between?

> > I am willing to take care of that and of the translation merges into
> > staging when translation is still based on stable.
>
> How is this useful? Here I can see a clear need of two translation
> branches. It translation is based on stable, we can not work on devel
> branch.

That's what I feared since the freeze: having to maintain two sets of 
translations.

> > Since one purpose of
> > getting staging up to date with regard to translations is to be able to
> > do extensive convert-ly work, the merging might be a bit tricky until
> > things move over completely.
>
> My proposal is to move to devel branch, merge master on translation
> and forget about stable.  We have been freezed for too long. Not a
> line of any new material in devel releases has been translated.
>
> > I am not sure when translators will want to move their focus to master
> > rather than stable again: it might be possible to create a branch
> > translation-stable for working on stable branch translations, but I
> > would like to phase out stable branch work eventually and so a separate
> > translation-stable can still be left for a time when we feel we really
> > need it.  Probably cherry-picking will be enough if commits for
> > unstable-only material are kept separate well enough.
>
> Agreed. But specifically, you mean cherry-picking
> translation-->staging or translation-->stable?

I think what should be done is
  translation synchronizes with staging
  translation-stable synchronizes with staging/x.y

so, there would be
1- one merry-go-round: staging->master->translation->staging
2- cherry-picking from master towards stable when needed
3- one merry-go-round stable <--> translation-stable

> > At any rate, with this plan it is more or less up to the translators to
> > decide when they think 2.16.1 is ready.  There is not much I
> > cherry-picked into the stable branch since the last translation merge,
> > and I'd not like to wait much longer than a week for 2.16.1 in
> > consequence, but 2.16.2 will likely take quite longer.
> >
> > People fine with that?
>
> The question is: translators, do you plan to update yet something for
> stable? whe we are reasonably done with stable, let's forget it and
> move to staging.
>
> As for Spanish, I am done. Can not speak for others.

I just updated the searchbox before having some visitors yesterday.
Everything is up to date on my side for 2.16.

One might check the result of a po-replace before releasing.

I'll be on vacation between nov. 5 and 11 (except one day for my 
mother's 80th birthday).

Cheers,
Jean-Charles