comprehensive-rust
comprehensive-rust copied to clipboard
google
ja: Chapter 0
mdbook servedoes NOT reflect translations in the following areas in both localhost and prod- same behavior as above observed in prod for Brazilian and Korean
- minor edits to table of contents for consistency in first commit
Part of #652.
- same behavior as above observed in prod for Brazilian and Korean
Strange, but I can reproduce this as well! Let me open a dedicated issue for this.
- same behavior as above observed in prod for Brazilian and Korean
Strange, but I can reproduce this as well! Let me open a dedicated issue for this.
ok, thank you
also note I see same in Ch.1.1, but only for the sentence with [Android Deep Dive]. Unable to confirm in prod as neither Brazilian nor Korean don't seem to have the specific translation in their .po files.
- same behavior as above observed in prod for Brazilian and Korean
Strange, but I can reproduce this as well! Let me open a dedicated issue for this.
ok, thank you
Ah, I tested this again!
The problem is that the paragraph has changed in a subtle way in the source material in #668. This means that the PO file is slightly outdated.
You have to refresh the ja.po file to incorporate the latest changes. You use msgmerge to do this. It will match the old English text with the new paragraph and re-use your translation. However, the whole entry is marked as "fuzzy", which means that someone (you) should proof-read it before removing the fuzzy marker.
This step is a bit annoying: msgmerge will cause a lot of diffs since it likely formats the file differently compared to your PO editor and compared to the format used by mdbook-xgetttext. Someone (probably me) needs to add some normalization code to the mdbook-i18n-helpers so that we can have more stable output from these tools.
For now, I would just ignore this and keep translating the PO file. You can decide when to synchronize the ja.po file when you feel there has been enough changes to src/ to make it worth the trouble.
@CoinEZ-JPN are you able to merge this PR now that it has been approved? I'm not actually sure if you can do that without having write access. If not, one of @keiichiw or @chikoski should merge it.
@mgeisler sorry, it doesn't look like I can
s/s↓
Thanks for testing, I'll merge it now!