On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 07:09, Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ãvar ArnfjÃrà Bjarmason venit, vidit, dixit 20.09.2010 22:37: > Would it be possible to split the infrastructure part from the actual > translations, i.e. have two or more dependent branches (which is > probably easier than reordering on a single branch)? > > I know at least one locale where we're actually in the early stages of a > fundamental discussion about translation principles. Blocking the whole > series because of that makes no sense. > > Also, the set of reviewers for infrastructure parts will be quite > different from that for individual translations. Firstly I'm hoping this gets merged soon so this all becomes a non-issue. But having multiple branches would be harder for me, I used to have three branches: infrastructure, gettextize and translations. Rebasing all of those on top of each other and testing each of them was a PITA, so I folded things back into one huge series. But I don't think any of this is a problem for translators, they just have to pull down any version of the series and start cracking at "make pot && msginit ...". Maybe that POT file is *slightly* out of date, but the translation strings themselves are really stable at this point, so that's always going to be <1-2% of the translation that needs to be fixed up & unfuzzied. So just submit translations, maybe they'll make it as part of the initial ab/i18n merge and maybe they won't. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html