Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

vi: Refresh Vietnamese translation #2061

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

vohoanglong0107
Copy link
Contributor

The English contents has changed, leading to untranslated session outline and schedule because the msgid no longer match the original contents. Additionally, incorrect file names are listed in the comment.
This PR follow the steps outlined in Refreshing an Existing Translation to refresh the Vietnamese translation file. After the update, some translated session outlines were no longer appropriated, so this PR also updates all of them

@vohoanglong0107 vohoanglong0107 marked this pull request as ready for review May 6, 2024 22:17
@vohoanglong0107 vohoanglong0107 force-pushed the vi-refresh-the-translation branch 2 times, most recently from 2d2226b to 395aad3 Compare May 9, 2024 23:11
@mgeisler mgeisler changed the title Refresh Vietnamese translation vi: Refresh Vietnamese translation May 21, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@mgeisler mgeisler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @vohoanglong0107, thanks so much for the amazing work done here and in the many other PRs!

I looked at the diff with

gh pr diff 2061 | bat -l patch

and noticed that this re-introduces line numbers on the file names. This is controlled with the granularity setting of mdbook-xgettext, but only recent versions of the tool understands it.

Can you try

cargo install mdbook-i18n-helpers

and regenerate the .pot file? After a msgmerge, the line numbers should disappear.

@vohoanglong0107
Copy link
Contributor Author

I understand. I though that the line number was an intended feature 😅 I have pushed a new change that remove the line number. Would you be able review it again?

@mgeisler
Copy link
Collaborator

I understand. I though that the line number was an intended feature 😅

It kindof is 😄 However, we've seen that small changes to the line numbers cause a lot of churn in the translation files, so a few months ago we asked people to stop including them: #1753.

If you find them useful, then you could include them here — but long term, I hope to move to a translation platform (#1305) and then these files might go away.

I have pushed a new change that remove the line number. Would you be able review it again?

Sure, it looks good to me!

Beware that refreshing the file likely leads to merge conflicts in the open PRs. It is possible to resolve the conflicts by hand or by using msgcat and msgmerge to join and reformat the .po file.

If you're okay with that, then I'm happy to merge the file.

@vohoanglong0107
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm okay with resolving some conflicts 😆 You could merge this once you feel it's okay to do so.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants