Hi, Am 22. September 2025 06:22:50 MESZ schrieb Cyril Brulebois <[email protected]>: >Let's quote doc/translations_po.txt: > > 1) Ensure the translation is _up to date_. The following command should > return > nothing. > './scripts/doc-check de' > > 2) Fix any places where you know you have deviated from the original in > your translation. The conversion will only work if the structure and > markup of the translation and original are *identical*, at least at > those points where the poxml utilities split out text into separate > strings. > >You're currently blocking on the first item, but the second one worries >me: while there has been a number of changes in recent years, trying to >keep pt_BR/ in sync, I fear there might be “structure and markup” >changes that are going to interfere. After all, that transition started >15 years ago…
I seem to remember that transition, and I left out pt_BR, because it was already too much outdated at that time. So as someone who cannot read pt_BR I was unable to do this transition, and no translator was available for help. If an automated conversion would have been possible, I would have done it at that time already... https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/installation-guide/-/commit/464f0319caad229bbc45da60b97432203073e4af > >I'm wondering whether the easiest (as in safest but cumbersome) might >not be to duplicate po/pot into po/pt_BR and see what you can copy and >paste between the existing, XML-based translation and the PO files. That would be my best guess as well, yes. Another idea: pt is in a very good state. Maybe you can copy that and *only* do some sort of adaptions for pt_BR? (no clue how big the differences are, but I seem to remember that someone did it this way for another document). Please keep the previous translators for pt listed in the files then. Greetings Holger -- Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3
