Re: Moving documentation to Git

Just a quick couple of ideas: - Use of tags in the main (english) branch and refer to them in the translation, a bit cumbersome but an option (we could use the hash instead too). - Keep a file (e.g.: ".version") with a main version and similar ones for each translation. Gives more leeway than the tag thing. Not the best of ideas, but just throwing them here in case they could be useful. Cheers. -- Jesus M. Castagnetto <jesus@castagnetto.com> Web: http://www.castagnetto.com/ On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> wrote: > On 10.10.2017 at 20:42, Andreas Heigl wrote: > > >> Am 10.10.2017 um 12:05 schrieb Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>: > > > >> Wasn't the main issue here, on how to show which translations needed > >> updating? Right now, that happens by comparing SVN revision numbers, > >> which are handily incremental. Git hashes are not like that. > > > > I went around that by comparing the last change date of the english and > the translated doc as well as how many revisions where created since then > of the resp. documents in the english and the translated repo. > > Both comparisons are irrelevant. It is not rare, that a typo in a > translation which is out-dated is applied as quick fix – still leaving > the translation out-dated. It seems to me that we still need some > manual way of increasing the revision (in the broadest sense) of a > translation, and to compare this to the original's revision. > > -- > Christoph M. Becker >