From: Frederico M. <fs...@gm...> - 2011-01-01 13:49:06
|
Hello, Yet again, sorry for the huge delay - and for the thread necromancy. 2010/10/26 Benny Malengier <ben...@gm...>: > Frederico, > > You were working an pt_PT. Did that lead to anything we can use already? Yes. Perhaps it's better to submit what I have right now which should be at least >80%. I was waiting for it to be 100% at the time. I will 1) Sync it with trunk 2) Read the documentation to see how to submit the po file I expect to have this done *today*. Not 100%, but quite clearly above any cut-over to remove the translation. > Greetings, > Benny > > 2010/10/26 lcc . <lcc...@gm...> >> >> I recall someone saying they'd complete the pt_PT translation, which >> could then be used to complement the pt_BR one. Too bad that never >> happened. Perhaps you could review this policy? Some text reports are >> complete at least, or were, but it shouldn't have changed much. Better >> 47% than nothing. lcc: Sorry about that, that was me (we talked privately backed then). Just like in the webpage translation I'm using mostly a cross-Atlantic translation that should be almost entirely usable in pt_BR. I'm going to send you (lcc) the po file directly for your analysis (give me a couple of hours to recover my backup). There are perhaps two or three details that you would like to change and that be done via find/replace. It would be however nice to have a mostly common translation, and diverge only when really needed. This was my aim at least. Regards, |