Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes: >> So how can we improve the efficiency of our current translation work >> force, and how can we make it easier for people to help in a way >> that does not step on anybody's toes and actually leads to better >> results? > > Yeah. Let's assume that I would like to quickly improve various > places of the German translation (for example, just fixing a typo). > What should I do? Directly committing to `staging' doesn't seem > appropriate...
We have a translation branch, but for typos, I think (correct me if I am wrong) that of little relevance as we have back-and-forth merging. However, this implies that a) no significant reformatting occurs, as that might have negative impact on parallel work b) the "typo" is an actual typo rather than, say, disagreement over the spelling reform to deploy Factual errors occuring only in one translation should be fixed there. Factual errors inherited from the English version should be fixed there first. If they are already fixed there, then the _whole_ relevant passage should be translated, and commit ids adapted, namely then the job should be done right, and likely in the translation branch. I have no big clue here, but that is more or less my gut feeling. I don't know how one would approach retranslating or reworking an existing passage. Do the regular translators get to see Rietveld reviews? A retranslation by a non-translator would seem to warrant proper review, but it would be somewhat pointless if the actual main translator only notices the review once it has been committed. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
