On 27/06/16 02:32, Matthias Gorissen wrote:

As an aside, I should also note that outscourcing translations to Transifex was one of the worst decisions ever made on this list. Transifex lacks a decent VCS, which means that I cannot easily see changes done by my collaborators. Things were way much easier when just used git. And we can get a seperate git-repo anywhere for free.

You can use the transifex client to pull the changes then commit it to a local repo. A simple script could be run each day. I know its far from an ideal solution, and you still to go to transifex to look at the change history... This has simplified things a lot from the handling of translation files at the pacman end. A

Am 27.06.2016 07:37, schrieb Allan McRae:

On 27/06/16 02:32, Matthias Gorissen wrote:

...

As an aside, I should also note that outscourcing translations to Transifex was one of the worst decisions ever made on this list. Transifex lacks a decent VCS, which means that I cannot easily see changes done by my collaborators. Things were way much easier when just used git. And we can get a seperate git-repo anywhere for free.

You can use the transifex client to pull the changes then commit it to a local repo. A simple script could be run each day. I know its far from an ideal solution, and you still to go to transifex to look at the change history...

This has simplified things a lot from the handling of translation files at the pacman end.

A Since you have seemed to grasped the basic message ("Matt hates Transifex!"), I don't want to make any fuzz about it. Devs make decisions, translators try to deliver in time.

A local repo (which I would own as leader of just one local-language community) is an awkward work-around, and somewhat against the principles of decentralization and collaborative work inspired by git. The crucial point here is that devs work continuasly, while translators get active only once or twice a year. So we will stick with the solution most comfortable at the dev-side.