Re: 2.16.1

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> I hope address@hidden is not a dead list (or did its list
> server die, or is it "moderated" with no moderator ever approving
> posts?).  At any rate, I sent several messages.

At least the second one with cc to several individuals.

> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [translations] Git translation branch policy change: merge with 
> and from stable/2.16
> To: Francisco Vila <address@hidden>
> Cc: Jean-Charles Malahieude <address@hidden>,  John Mandereau 
> <address@hidden>,  Translations list at lilynet <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 12:44:29 +0200 (21 hours, 30 minutes, 46 seconds ago)
>
>
> If it is ok with people, I'd propose the following course in order to
> get the ball rolling again:
>
> I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation.  That should be
> unproblematic.

The only reaction to that was a mail from Francisco which did not much
to address this part of my plan.

I did this right now, and afterwards discovered that there is a branch
translation-staging.  It is obvious that I suffer from a case of having
not kept track of how translations are actually organized, so it may be
possible that someone would need to hand-advance translation-staging to
match translation, assuming that the organization of
translation/translation-staging is similar to master/staging with regard
to automatic testing.

Ugh.  Sorry for that.  With the apparent lack of
replies/comments/interest (possibly due to the translation list just
downing any contribution from non-list-members), I felt I needed to move
ahead in _some_ manner.

> Then I'll merge translation into staging.  This will require a bit of
> cleanup and conflict resolution.

At any rate, probably somebody who is reasonably sure to be able to
write to the translators list should copy this kind of
information/question there.

-- 
David Kastrup