Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Release/include qm #85

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

Release/include qm #85

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

Guts
Copy link
Collaborator

@Guts Guts commented Aug 16, 2021

Close #47

This PR:

  • make the translation module independent from a specific service (here transifex)
  • implement the logic to process local translations (CLI options, etc.)
  • minor improvments

Copy link
Collaborator

@Gustry Gustry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks fine, thanks

Can you update the sphinx documentation ?

@Guts
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Guts commented Aug 26, 2021

Looks fine, thanks

Thnaks. Still, I'm a bit confused about failing tests 🤔.

Can you update the sphinx documentation ?

Done.

@Gustry
Copy link
Collaborator

Gustry commented Aug 27, 2021

@3nids
Copy link
Member

3nids commented Mar 17, 2022

I am wondering if we should not go a bit further.

The transifex integration has always been a pain in plugin-ci (we rely on a self-made Python lib for it, it prevents from running parallel test jobs).

For the translations, at the moment we cannot avoid using a sub-process to update and compile strings (see https://github.com/opengisch/qgis-plugin-ci/blob/master/qgispluginci/translation.py#L125-L143).

So I am wondering if we should not just make the translation completely agnostic of any platform.
We could just provide pull/push commands as strings in the config that we would run using sub-process (or we hardcode them if that sounds too bad i.e.: if transifex: subprocess.run(tx_pull_cmd))

The only drawback of this would be that the project won't be created automatically anymore on Transifex (which is super useful to me as I don't need to head to transifex at all).

Thoughts?

@Guts
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Guts commented Mar 17, 2022

I completely agree.

The tool creates an amalgam between translation management and a third party service (transifex). Besides, the ecosystem now seems to react positively to the emergence of weblate and it's a shame not to offer it or rather to impose transifex.

More globally, the tool is currently very much imprinted with our respective development habits whereas I think it would gain in adoption to be more generic/agnostic.

But I think it implies a refactoring.

@Guts
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Guts commented Mar 17, 2022

Furthermore, speaking of this (almost stale) PR, I've managed my needs by manipulating the gitignore to include qm files without adding them to the tracking files (let's argue against binary files into a git repo). Workflow example:

  1. build/compile translations from ts and pro files and upload build result as artifact: example
  2. download it, amend the git ignore and add qm file to tracked files: example

@3nids
Copy link
Member

3nids commented Mar 17, 2022

To add to the topic, we lately changed our habits.
In the past, we were only having the TS files on the remote service and download them when needed.
Lately, we tend to see them as being part of the source.

@Guts Guts marked this pull request as draft February 9, 2023 20:19
@Guts Guts closed this Apr 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Release: compiled translations are not included into final zip
3 participants