Merge lp:~numerigraphe/openobject-server/6.0-translations-lost-933496-odo into lp:openobject-server/6.0
Proposed by
Numérigraphe
Status: | Rejected |
---|---|
Rejected by: | Olivier Dony (Odoo) |
Proposed branch: | lp:~numerigraphe/openobject-server/6.0-translations-lost-933496-odo |
Merge into: | lp:openobject-server/6.0 |
Diff against target: |
36 lines (+9/-7) 1 file modified
bin/addons/base/ir/ir_translation.py (+9/-7) |
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~numerigraphe/openobject-server/6.0-translations-lost-933496-odo |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Olivier Dony (Odoo) | Pending | ||
OpenERP Core Team | Pending | ||
Review via email: mp+129157@code.launchpad.net |
Description of the change
This branch fixes an issue in translations, that makes translations unavailable in stable releases when the strings are removed from the trunk.
It is based on a patch by Olivier Dony, with an additional correction to actually fix the issue.
Lionel Sausin.
To post a comment you must log in.
Thanks a lot for finishing my proof-of-concept patch, Lionel. The patch seems to work but after thinking about it more we think it might create really weird bugs, due to the way our translation entries are matched (name and/or source).
As you noticed, a simple change in the results ordering can give completely incomprehensible results to the user, and the same could happen when the matching translations are deleted for any reason -> the system would fallback to incorrect matches. Therefor it seems safer and more correct to use the comments that are in the PO templates, and which are not subject to alteration by Launchpad.
The patch Thu implemented in lp:~openerp-dev/openobject-server/6.1-fix-po-targets-933496-vmt is a little bit longer but should be completely low-risk. It also comes with a proper testcase (a test module for trunk - included in 6.1 for documentation purpose), have a look at it and feel free to ask for more cases to be covered if you don't feel confident with it. Backporting it to 6.0 should be simple enough if you really need to do so.
I hope you don't me closing your merge proposals to indicate that we prefer the safer solution. Sorry for having lead you towards an imperfect solution - it can still be used as a temporary fix.