Re: Translations at pgfoundry (was Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates)

2005-01-21 Thread Nicolai Tufar
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:08:20 +0100, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Maybe we should have a pgfoundry project where all translations > > > were kept, and from which the main CVS could be updated > > > semi-automatically. Then we wouldn't have Peter checkin

Re: Translations at pgfoundry (was Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates)

2005-01-20 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Hi Peter, > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Maybe we should have a pgfoundry project where all translations > > > were kept, and from which the main CVS could be updated > > > semi-automatically. Then we wouldn't have Peter checking out and > > > committing all the time. > > > > That sounds like a f

Re: Translations at pgfoundry (was Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates)

2005-01-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 02:08:20PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Maybe we should have a pgfoundry project where all translations > > > were kept, and from which the main CVS could be updated > > > semi-automatically. Then we wouldn't have Peter checking out and > >

Translations at pgfoundry (was Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates)

2005-01-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Maybe we should have a pgfoundry project where all translations > > were kept, and from which the main CVS could be updated > > semi-automatically. Then we wouldn't have Peter checking out and > > committing all the time. > > That sounds like a fine idea. My only concer

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates

2005-01-17 Thread Nicolai Tufar
> >Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Maybe we should have a pgfoundry project where all translations were > > kept, and from which the main CVS could be updated > > semi-automatically. Then we wouldn't have Peter checking out and > > committing all the time. > >Peter Eisentraut wrote: > That sounds like a

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates

2005-01-17 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > There were several on 100% until some more messages were marked for > translation. Doing that days before release was not a good idea IMO. Yeah, I though so too, but if you think about it, it doesn't harm anyone except your statistics. :) > Maybe we should have a pgfound

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates

2005-01-17 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 01:40:40PM +0200, Nicolai Tufar wrote: > Wow, > Turkish seem to be the first translation to report 100% translation > completion for 8.0 release. Congratulations for great work! And thanks > to Peter for being patient with us all this time. There were several on 100% unti

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates

2005-01-17 Thread Nicolai Tufar
Wow, Turkish seem to be the first translation to report 100% translation completion for 8.0 release. Congratulations for great work! And thanks to Peter for being patient with us all this time. > > We can't reproduce it with msgfmt -v. How do you get those errors? > > The scripts that produce t

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates

2005-01-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Devrim GUNDUZ wrote: > These are the latest updates: Installed. > BTW... Peter, we see some errors on postgres-tr.po file, on nlsstatus > page > (http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/nlsstatus/po-current/postgre >s-tr.po.err) po/postgres-tr.po:9383: number of format specifiers in > msgid and m