Roan Kattouw wrote:
I don't understand the logic here. You're a
software developer, *so* you
hate web interfaces? Remember that what you're localizing is exactly
that: a web interface. There's nothing you can do with direct SVN access
that you can't do through BetaWiki (except for adding comments, maybe?
Siebrand?), and the latter provides a wikilinked list of untranslated
messages, which makes it lots easier to find that one message you
accidentally skipped.
Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
It is his own choice. I, for example, think localizing through a web interface
may be slow, and its committing is slower anyway than an immediate "svn commit"
(though possibly faster than a patch applying - no idea about that). Commiting
is the direct way for the one who can do that, and he may use the scripts
"checkLanguage.php" and "rebuildLanguage.php" to simplify the
translation work.
When a translation approaches a certain level of completeness, the translator
usually just has to update or add a few messages per time, and for this,
updating the PHP file is better for the ones who have both the commit access and
the PHP knowledge. No doubt BetaWiki is needed for people who don't have commit
access (and don't want to submit patch) or PHP knowledge, and for people who
don't want to directly edit the PHP file; but other people just don't need or
want it.
Anyway, the fact someone doesn't use BetaWiki doesn't mean his concerns should
be ignored: if he says a specific translation quality is bad, and is known to be
a high-level speaker (and translator) of this language, it should not be
commited (this is a general statement, and doesn't necessarily refer to the
translation in question).