Re: webwml in git?
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 02:22:20PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 01:16:34PM +0100, Peter Krefting wrote:
> > The problem is handling the translation revision tracking, as Git does
> > not have any numerical revision numbers. It can of course be solved,
> > but it might be a bit more inconvenient for translators since it most
> > likely will need to work with the big SHA-1 hashes.
>
> This is a show-stopper, really... We can get people to sacrifice a few more
> hundreds of gigabytes of disk for translation purposes, but we can't
> sacrifice the basic userfriendliness of the workflow - disk space is much
> cheaper than human time. We already have various hurdles people need to
> jump, introducing more for the sake of a bunch of advanced features that
> will be seldom used (or at least I haven't seen suggestions to the
> contrary...?) doesn't strike me as a particularly good idea.
>
> Now, forcing people to compare a bunch of of hashes just to be able to keep
> up, is a net loss. But if that change is coupled with the introduction of
> tools that automate the process of keeping up in a user-friendly way... :)
You mean things like tagging each "master" commits automatically with hook script with something like:
auto-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS.xxxx
Then translator can embed this into translation just as CVS version
thingy.
Reply to: