danielrainer
danielrainer
For Fluent, we probably want fuzzy annotations, at least for cases where translations are still usable after an update to the English version (e.g. when a bit of text was...
> Can't addition of a arguments be modeled with fuzzy state (I thought unused arguments don't cause errors?) It would work, but I don't think it's a good idea to...
Actually, I don't think the term `fuzzy` makes sense for Fluent. Something like `needs-review` might be better.
> 1. for minor changes we add `# needs review` comments to the translations Sounds reasonable. Then, we would want tooling which adds this comment to a certain message ID...
The Fluent PR no longer depends on this, so there is no immediate need to get these changes merged. If you'd like, we can just close this PR. I don't...
If adding a Python formatter is indeed not needed, `rustfmt` is probably also redundant.
Yeah, our approach of extracting translatable strings using regex parsing is quite brittle. It might be possible to use fish's parser to get more reliable results. I'm not sure how...
Yes, we should be able to move most things into separate scripts. One annoyance with cargo is that there does not seem to be a good way to run code...
If we keep supporting builds without embedded data it is indeed fairly annoying to get installation of the data files right. I'm not particularly convinced by the multi-user argument. If...
> I should say that I don't actually have a problem with continuing to ship a CMake build. Having two separate build systems requires significant extra effort compared to only...