LTS and translation and branch

[Albert Astals Cid]

El diumenge, 23 d’octubre de 2016, a les 10:06:52 CEST, Karl Ove Hufthammer va 
escriure:
> Martin Schlander skreiv 19. okt. 2016 20:25:
> > Tirsdag den 18. oktober 2016 08:32:35 skrev Weng Xuetian:
> >> Right now we only have two branch stable / trunk for translation. With
> >> this
> >> new LTS, is there anything gonna change?
> > 
> > Iirc there was a discussion at one point. And the conclusion was not to
> > create a separate translation branch for it with all the extra troubles
> > that involves.
> > 
> > That still leaves you another three months or thereabouts to complete 5.8
> > translations.
> > 
> > I personally agree with the decision. You have plenty of time to complete
> > translations and we have enough branches already and svn repositories to
> > keep track of as it is. My only slight concern is developers breaking
> > string freeze with their patches after 5.8 has become "untranslatable".
> 
> That’s really a shame. This means that there will be over a year (from
> 2017-01-12 to 2018-04-10, according the current schedule) with regular
> releases of 5.8 LTS, with improvements and fixes to the code, but with
> no option of improving or fixing the translations.
> 
> I do see that adding new branches complicate things. But with the 5.8
> LTS being a *stable* branches, I guess it would be pretty, well, stable,
> with e.g. no files being renamed or moved between modules, no libraries
> being merged or splitted or other things that complicate some of the
> branches.
> 
> And for the (currently 22) translation teams that use the summit
> workflow, there would be ~no extra work maintaining a LTS branch of
> translations in addition to the four other branches we already maintain.
> Teams that don’t use the summit workflow would of course have to choose
> if they would want to take on the work of actively maintaining the LTS
> branch too, or just to fix/backport important translation errors (yes,
 
> translations *do* have bugs too 

This is an important note that keeps me undecided on what to do regarding the 
Plasma LTS translations.

Basically there's three options when Plasma 5.9 becomes the stable branch:
 A) We freeze the Plasma 5.8 translations and we ship that with all subsequent 
releases of Plasma 5.8.x

 B) We put the plasma 5.8 translations in a different branch where the 
releases pick them up, but we do not make this part of the daily "update .po 
file" process scripty runs

 C) We put the plasma 5.8 translations in a different branch where the 
releases pick them up *and* we make this part of the daily "update .po file" 
process scripty runs


The "most ideal" solution is probably C, but I am not sure the machine doing 
all the scripty runs has enough CPU power to go over another branch every day, 
so we may have to end up with B) as a compromise and update the templates 
manually if some change happens in the code (yeah, wishful thinking i know)


In any case, even if we do C I don't see myself adding that branch to the 
webpage statistics.


Cheers,
  Albert

> – in the worst case mistranslations that
> completely change the meaning of strings, e.g. the word ‘not’
> accidentally being left out of the translation (I’ve seen it happen)).