Re: contrib translations

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: contrib translations
Date: 2012-09-14 20:49:55
Message-ID: 50539873.1050504@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 9/14/12 10:13 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:59:45AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie sep 14 10:37:18 -0300 2012:
>>> Someone asked me about translations for pg_upgrade, and I don't see 'po'
>>> directories for any of the contrib tools. Do we not translate contrib
>>> stuff? Why?
>>
>> We don't. I don't know the exact reason, but I know that while perusing
>> pg_upgrade's source recently I found several things that will need to be
>> changed there in order for it to be decently translatable. Some _()
>> were in the wrong places, there are several cases of sentences being
>> constructed from parts, and so on.
>>
>> If we were to move it to src/bin/ then we would have to talk about
>> translatability. Prior to that I would think it's premature. I mean,
>> if we don't consider it good enough to be in src/bin/, why waste
>> translator time on it?
>
> This was a more general question of why contrib doesn't get _any_
> translations.

There is no particular reason. Someone just needs to do the (small
amount of) work to set it up.

I'd be a bit worried about having about 50 modules of maybe 5 strings
each, which would considerably increase the overhead of managing the
translations. It would be better if we could set it up to have 1 (or 2
or 3) modules of about 100 strings.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-09-14 20:57:54 Re: embedded list v2
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-09-14 20:48:35 Re: embedded list v2