Autor: flapflap Data: A: tails-l10n Assumpte: Re: [Tails-l10n] [Review](de) wiki translation for truecrypt
flapflap: > flapflap:
>> Frithjof:
>>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 1:40 PM, intrigeri <intrigeri@???> wrote:
>>>> flapflap wrote (09 Apr 2014 22:57:31 GMT) :
>>>>> May I rebase that branch on top of a more recent (e.g. the current)
>>>>> master, before reviews?
>>>>> (or should it remain there, where it is?)
>>>>
>>>> Merging the current master into a branch that you want to see reviewed
>>>> is good, as it allows the reviewer to easily diff current
>>>> master..$BRANCH, and it moves the responsibility of taking care of any
>>>> merge conflict (if any) onto the shoulders of the person preparing the
>>>> branch, instead of the person who will actually merge it (and may not
>>>> speak the language of the conflicting PO files, so may not be
>>>> qualified to properly solve conflicts).
>>>>
>>>> Rebasing an already published branch is OK *only* if you're 100% sure
>>>> that nobody has started looking at this branch yet, or based any other
>>>> work on top of it. It's quite rare that all these conditions are met.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do you want to merge the master flapflap?
>> I followed the advice and merged the current master (no conflicts).
>>> If you want to rebase will wait with commiting a review patch.
>> No, I'll leave it as it is.
>> For the next time, I won't send so many review requests in parallel,
>> only one after the other and then those being based on a more recent
>> master. Lesson learned.
>>
>> The branch `truecrypt' now looks like this:
>> 91a102d Merge branch 'master' into truecrypt
>> 2938ee5 (de) wiki translation for truecrypt: language improvement
>> 7f7c2f8 (de) wiki translation for truecrypt: poedit file header update
>> c91cdf0 (de) wiki translation for truecrypt
>
> ping?
> (@Frithjof: only meant as reminder; if you're busy at the moment just
> tell us and maybe someone else has time for the review)
ping?
(it can still be merged cleanly into current master)
