Quantifiers +, *, ? and {n}

[peruibeloko]

[javascript-translate-bot]

Please make the requested changes. After it, add a comment "/done".
Then I'll ask for a new review :ghost:

[nazarepiedady]

@jonnathan-ls, could you review it?

[nazarepiedady]

@Peruibeloko, I think you could also look at your own pull request and approve it if you agree with what you did. This would help a lot when we don't have enough people online to look at it.

[peruibeloko]

@nazarepiedady that would be a conflict of interests, wouldn't it? the idea of reviews is to catch errors

[nazarepiedady]

@Peruibeloko, yes, but you are also a reviewer even not being a maintainer. I also think that you have a good point.

[peruibeloko]

/done

[nazarepiedady]

@Peruibeloko, excellent, now we can go forward. @odsantos, and @jonnathan-ls, could you review it quickly as possible?

We need to merge all current opened pull request to do a good review on the issues and to organise the things to start to add new translations.

[jonnathan-ls]

that would be a conflict of interests, wouldn't it? the idea of reviews is to catch errors

I agree with @Peruibeloko in relation to the translator ending up accepting the PR itself, although it is a documentation repository, if we consider the same premise as the code, whoever opened the PR may end up missing errors that they would not end up catching, hence the need to have reviewers for a look beyond the context (this corroborates the project's premise of having 02 reviewers, to avoid possible translation errors and ending up being taken to production when the translation is incorporated into the javascript.info website '

But I also consider @nazarepiedady's observation valid, unfortunately there are few contributors to this project and we need to release the translation. As it is a documentation repository and not a code repository, perhaps we can be a little more flexible, but if we are going to follow a path like this, I think it is worth creating a separate issue first to evaluate the opinion of other maintainers, at the same time time to ensure that we do not violate the premise adopted by the project owner (repository in English).

[nazarepiedady]

@Peruibeloko, @jonnathan-ls, unfortunately this project do not have so many active maintainers so if we depend on the maintainers that are not so active we can not go ahead.

[peruibeloko]

@nazarepiedady I think your approval is the only one remaining

[javascript-translate-bot]

Thank you :sparkling_heart: I updated the Progress Issue #1 :tada: :tada: :tada: