Just to make sure, We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other rule can be ignored. 0 : n==1 : singular form 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form 2 : n==2 : dual form We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be correct. (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward compatibility) Thanks, Niv בתאריך 14 בספט׳ 2016 09:52,‏ "ניב באר" <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; כתב: >Thanks for the suggestion, take a quick look at the cardinal part, it shows exactly what we're talking about so CLDR has this rule already :) I guess you are referring to the dual rule.. the rule for the many form there is incorrect[1] and should be fixed (at CLDR at least, we do not really need it for translations) [1]http://hebrew-academy.org.il/topic/hahlatot/grammardecisi ons/terminology-ordinance/4-3-%d7%94%d7%a9%d7%99%d7%9e%d7% 95%d7%a9-%d7%91%d7%a9%d7%9d-%d7%94%d7%9e%d7%a1%d7%a4%d7%a8/#target-3363 (it's in hebrew, sorry) 2016-09-14 9:37 GMT+03:00 Yaron Shahrabani <sh.yaron(a)gmail.com&gt;: > Hi Yuri! > Thanks for the suggestion, take a quick look at the cardinal part, it > shows exactly what we're talking about so CLDR has this rule already :) > > Yaron Shahrabani > > <DevOps - Hebrew translator> > > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Yuri Chornoivan <yurchor(a)ukr.net&gt; wrote: > >> середа, 14-вер-2016 08:56:32 ניב באר написано: >> > Thank you, >> > forth form isn't quiet correct >> > >> > The actual hebrew plural forms are the following: >> > >> > one object - use singular form >> > >> > two objects - use dual form for specific cases, otherwise use plural >> form >> > >> > 3-10 objects - use plural form >> > >> > none or more than 10 objects - can use plural form or many form >> (optional) >> > >> > >> > also, with both singular and dual form the number should not be written >> > (anaconda, for example, does not aloow it). >> > >> > >> > generally, the many form isn't required but it could be nice to have >> (and >> > prefered when speaking of years), >> > >> > it is not widely use and we can do without him (using the regular >> plural >> > form will sound natural as well). >> > >> > >> > In most cases, the existing plural form can be copied into the other >> form >> > (or two). >> > >> > >> > I will also try to see if I can find a source in english who can >> support it >> > (I could only find in hebrew and not all in one place). >> > >> > >> > I can review the translations on Zanata and I will try to contact >> hebrew >> > translators of another projects >> > >> > >> > Thanks again, >> > Niv >> >> Hi, >> >> Just 2 cents+ >> >> It is worth to inspect (and change if needed) the plural rules on CLDR. >> >> http://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/29/supplemental/language_ >> plural_rules.html#he >> >> These rules are widely used in hardcoding the plural forms for many >> projects >> including FOSS. >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Best regards, >> Yuri >> > >> > 2016-09-14 2:41 GMT+03:00 Rafal Luzynski < >> digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt;: >> > > 13.09.2016 10:06 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> > > > Hello, >> > > > The plural form for hebrew is currently set as: >> > > > nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1); >> > > > >> > > > Altough plurals form fits in most cases, >> > > > we do have dual form in hebrew which is mostly used when speaking >> about >> > > > >> > > > time[1]. >> > > > >> > > > which makes the use of plural form in those cases seems unnatural. >> > > > >> > > > I would like to update hebrew plural form to be: >> > > > nplurals=3; plural=(n==1) ? 0 : 1 + (n==2); >> > > >> > > This formula looks tricky and I can't confirm it will always work >> > > as expected. Also it must be less obfuscated for other human readers. >> > > >> > > I have grepped over the source code of those several projects >> > > from GNOME whose source code I apparently have on my computer >> > > and all of them use the simple nplurals=2 system in Hebrew >> > > >> > > except GNOME Software [2] which uses this expression: >> > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; >> > > >> > > Our reference source should be CLDR [3] which mentions >> > > four forms for Hebrew: >> > > >> > > - one (n==1); >> > > - two (n==2); >> > > - many: dividable by 10 except 10 itself (n%10==0 && n>10) >> > > - other (including 0 and 10). >> > > >> > > Can you confirm you need this fourth form for the numbers >> > > dividable by 10? >> > > >> > > Otherwise, it seems you have spotted a bug in Hebrew language >> > > configuration. IMHO the plural rules for Hebrew should be >> > > changed to reflect all possible cases and you will have to live >> > > with the fact that in most cases two or three forms will be >> > > identical. >> > > >> > > > or at least to be able to specify a custom plural form to a >> project on >> > > > >> > > > Zanata. >> > > >> > > I don't know if it's possible to change the plural rules for >> > > a single project but indeed it should be acceptable if the >> > > problem is so rare that it actually appears only in few projects. >> > > Otherwise it should be changed globally, for all projects >> > > in Zanata. Of course, it will break your existing translations >> > > so you will have to review them all. Sounds overwhelming but >> > > the satisfaction when you see all plural forms displayed correctly >> > > in your computer is priceless. >> > > >> > > Also note that I know nothing about Hebrew language so I can't >> > > confirm what plural rules are correct and whether they should be >> > > applied globally or exceptionally for just few projects. I think >> > > these rules should be confirmed by other Hebrew speaking people >> > > and by references to some external and reliable sources like >> > > CLDR or ISO documents or a national language regulator. >> > > >> > > Best regards, >> > > >> > > Rafal >> > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > Niv Baehr >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_(grammatical_number) >> > > >> > > #Modern_Hebrew >> > > >> > > [2] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po >> > > [3] >> > > http://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/29/supplemental/ >> > > language_plural_rules.html >> -- >> trans mailing list >> trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedo >> raproject.org >> > > > -- > trans mailing list > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedoraproject.org >

now I'd suggest this one as more readable: nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: msgstr[0] "Singular form" msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" msgstr[2] "Dual form" Can we have this formula for now?

Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities!

But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... or * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ...

14.09.2016 13:30 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > Just to make sure, > We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other rule can be > ignored. > > 0 : n==1 : singular form > 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form > 2 : n==2 : dual form > > We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be correct. > > (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward compatibility) > > Thanks, > Niv As for now it looks clear to me that Hebrew language needs at least the dual form to be added. Even if dual form usually will be the same as the plural we need a mechanism and leave it to the translators whether they use it in particular cases or not. Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... or * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... As long as it's clear that dual number is necessary and it's not clear whether and when the "many" number is necessary I suggest adding the dual number rule and not adding the "many" number yet. As far as I understood, missing dual number is incorrect while missing "many" number is not. Although previously I referred to this formula: [1] nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; now I'd suggest this one as more readable: nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: msgstr[0] "Singular form" msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" msgstr[2] "Dual form" Can we have this formula for now? For the record, here [2] is a formula for Hebrew according to what CLDR curently says: nplurals=4; plural=(n == 1) ? 0 : ((n == 2) ? 1 : (((n < 0 || n > 10) && n % 10 == 0) ? 2 : 3)) Regards, Rafal [1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po [2] http://mlocati.github.io/cldr-to-gettext-plural-rules/

(message was cut..) but again, using the regular plural form is correct*. Thanks, Niv *user reading in hebrew the sentence "2 days ago" translated as "לפני 2 ימים" will get the filling this sentence is not natural and should be "לפני יומיים" user reading in hebrew the sentence "20 days ago" translated as "לפני 20 ימים" will continue reading without paying attention that the form "לפני 20 יום" exists as well 2016-09-15 12:12 GMT+03:00 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt;: > >now I'd suggest this one as more readable: > > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > > > >Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: > > > >msgstr[0] "Singular form" > >msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" > >msgstr[2] "Dual form" > > > >Can we have this formula for now? > > That's great, thank you. > > >Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. > >You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would > >be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, > >using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! > > as using the regular plural form is correct (seem natural to the user*), > it will only add unneeded extra complexity, > so we'd prefer to leave it for now. > meanwhile, > projects who want can do it manipulating the .po file header (as GNOME > Software did) > for overall standard, > we can always turn over the world again at later time :) > > >But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: > >* for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... > >or > >* for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... > the latter, for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... (n>10) > but again, using the regular plural form is correct*. > > Thanks, > Niv > > *user reading in hebrew the sentence "2 days ago" translated as "לפני 2 > ימים" will get the filling this sentence is not natural and should be "לפני > יומיים" > user reading in hebrew the sentence "20 days ago" translated as "לפני 20 > ימים" will continue reading without paying attention that the form "לפני 20 > יום" exists as well 2016-09-15 2:19 GMT+03:00 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt;: > 14.09.2016 13:30 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > > Just to make sure, > > We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other rule can be > > ignored. > > > > 0 : n==1 : singular form > > 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form > > 2 : n==2 : dual form > > > > We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be > correct. > > > > (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward > compatibility) > > > > Thanks, > > Niv > > As for now it looks clear to me that Hebrew language needs at least > the dual form to be added. Even if dual form usually will be the > same as the plural we need a mechanism and leave it to the translators > whether they use it in particular cases or not. > > Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. > You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would > be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, > using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! But for > now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: > > * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... > or > * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... > > As long as it's clear that dual number is necessary and it's > not clear whether and when the "many" number is necessary > I suggest adding the dual number rule and not adding the "many" > number yet. As far as I understood, missing dual number is > incorrect while missing "many" number is not. > > Although previously I referred to this formula: [1] > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; > > now I'd suggest this one as more readable: > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > > Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: > > msgstr[0] "Singular form" > msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" > msgstr[2] "Dual form" > > Can we have this formula for now? > > For the record, here [2] is a formula for Hebrew according to > what CLDR curently says: > > nplurals=4; plural=(n == 1) ? 0 : ((n == 2) ? 1 : (((n < 0 || n > 10) > && n % > 10 == 0) ? 2 : 3)) > > Regards, > > Rafal > > > [1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po > [2] http://mlocati.github.io/cldr-to-gettext-plural-rules/ >

(please ignore my last 3 messages - I was just me having trouble sending this message - here is the complete message) >now I'd suggest this one as more readable: > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > >Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: > >msgstr[0] "Singular form" >msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" >msgstr[2] "Dual form" > >Can we have this formula for now? That's great, thank you. >Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. >You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would >be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, >using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! as using the regular plural form is correct (seem natural to the user*), it will only add unneeded extra complexity, so we'd prefer to leave it for now. meanwhile, projects who want can do it manipulating the .po file header (as GNOME Software did) for overall standard, we can always turn over the world again at later time :) >But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: >* for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... >or >* for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... the latter, for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... (n>10) but again, using the regular plural form is correct*. Thanks, Niv *user reading in hebrew the sentence "2 days ago" translated as "לפני 2 ימים" will get the filling this sentence is not natural and should be "לפני יומיים" user reading in hebrew the sentence "20 days ago" translated as "לפני 20 ימים" will continue reading without paying attention that the form "לפני 20 יום" exists as well 2016-09-15 2:19 GMT+03:00 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com mailto:digitalfreak@lingonborough.com >: > > 14.09.2016 13:30 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com mailto:bloop93@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > > Just to make sure, > > We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other rule can > > be > > ignored. > > > > 0 : n==1 : singular form > > 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form > > 2 : n==2 : dual form > > > > We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be > > correct. > > > > (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward > > compatibility) > > > > Thanks, > > Niv > > As for now it looks clear to me that Hebrew language needs at least > the dual form to be added. Even if dual form usually will be the > same as the plural we need a mechanism and leave it to the translators > whether they use it in particular cases or not. > > Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. > You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would > be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, > using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! But for > now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: > > * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... > or > * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... > > As long as it's clear that dual number is necessary and it's > not clear whether and when the "many" number is necessary > I suggest adding the dual number rule and not adding the "many" > number yet. As far as I understood, missing dual number is > incorrect while missing "many" number is not. > > Although previously I referred to this formula: [1] > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; > > now I'd suggest this one as more readable: > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > > Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: > > msgstr[0] "Singular form" > msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" > msgstr[2] "Dual form" > > Can we have this formula for now? > > For the record, here [2] is a formula for Hebrew according to > what CLDR curently says: > > nplurals=4; plural=(n == 1) ? 0 : ((n == 2) ? 1 : (((n < 0 || n > 10) > && n % > 10 == 0) ? 2 : 3)) > > Regards, > > Rafal > > > [1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po > [2] http://mlocati.github.io/cldr-to-gettext-plural-rules/ > > -- trans mailing list trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedoraproject.org

Ping! Can we have this change introduced, please? For the reminder, a formula like this is needed for Hebrew language globally: nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; Should a ticket be filed somewhere? Thank you in advance. Rafal 16.09.2016 01:17 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt; wrote: > > > Thank you, Niv. For me it's clear that we should introduce the > dual number in Hebrew globally and not introduce the "many" form. > It will be introduced only if it turns out to be needed. > > Please note that what I write here is just my kindly suggestion, > not the decision. Can we ask the Zanata administrators and/or > developers to introduce this change, please? > > Regards, > > Rafal > > > 15.09.2016 11:23 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > (please ignore my last 3 messages - I was just me having trouble sending > > this > > message - here is the complete message) > > > > >now I'd suggest this one as more readable: > > > > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > > > > > >Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: > > > > > >msgstr[0] "Singular form" > > >msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" > > >msgstr[2] "Dual form" > > > > > >Can we have this formula for now? > > > > That's great, thank you. > > > > >Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. > > >You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would > > >be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, > > >using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! > > > > as using the regular plural form is correct (seem natural to the user*), > > it will only add unneeded extra complexity, > > so we'd prefer to leave it for now. > > meanwhile, > > projects who want can do it manipulating the .po file header (as GNOME > > Software did) > > for overall standard, > > we can always turn over the world again at later time :) > > > > >But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: > > >* for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... > > >or > > >* for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... > > the latter, for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... (n>10) > > but again, using the regular plural form is correct*. > > > > Thanks, > > Niv > > > > *user reading in hebrew the sentence "2 days ago" translated as "לפני 2 > > ימים" > > will get the filling this sentence is not natural and should be "לפני > > יומיים" > > > > user reading in hebrew the sentence "20 days ago" translated as "לפני 20 > > ימים" will continue reading without paying attention that the form "לפני 20 > > יום" exists as well > > > > 2016-09-15 2:19 GMT+03:00 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@lingonborough. com > > mailto:digitalfreak@lingonborough.com >: > > > > 14.09.2016 13:30 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com mailto: bloop93(a)gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to make sure, > > > > We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other rule can > > > > be > > > > ignored. > > > > > > > > 0 : n==1 : singular form > > > > 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form > > > > 2 : n==2 : dual form > > > > > > > > We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be > > > > correct. > > > > > > > > (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward > > > > compatibility) > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Niv > > > > > > As for now it looks clear to me that Hebrew language needs at least > > > the dual form to be added. Even if dual form usually will be the > > > same as the plural we need a mechanism and leave it to the translators > > > whether they use it in particular cases or not. > > > > > > Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. > > > You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would > > > be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, > > > using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! But for > > > now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: > > > > > > * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... > > > or > > > * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... > > > > > > As long as it's clear that dual number is necessary and it's > > > not clear whether and when the "many" number is necessary > > > I suggest adding the dual number rule and not adding the "many" > > > number yet. As far as I understood, missing dual number is > > > incorrect while missing "many" number is not. > > > > > > Although previously I referred to this formula: [1] > > > > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; > > > > > > now I'd suggest this one as more readable: > > > > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > > > > > > Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: > > > > > > msgstr[0] "Singular form" > > > msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" > > > msgstr[2] "Dual form" > > > > > > Can we have this formula for now? > > > > > > For the record, here [2] is a formula for Hebrew according to > > > what CLDR curently says: > > > > > > nplurals=4; plural=(n == 1) ? 0 : ((n == 2) ? 1 : (((n < 0 || n > 10) > > > && n % > > > 10 == 0) ? 2 : 3)) > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Rafal > > > > > > > > > [1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po > > > [2] http://mlocati.github.io/cldr-to-gettext-plural-rules/ > > > > -- > > trans mailing list > > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists. fedoraproject.org > > > > > -- > trans mailing list > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists. fedoraproject.org _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

Thank you Sylvia, Bug opened: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378576 problem is, it seems to be targeted at the Hebrew team coordinator, but I think an admin is needed for introducing this change) Also, thank you again Rafal, much appreciated. 2016-09-22 20:33 GMT+03:00 Sylvia Sánchez <lailahfsf(a)gmail.com&gt;: > > Or a bug? I think Bugzilla fits better for this. > > > Cheers, > Sylvia > > > > On 22 September 2016 at 11:33, Rafal Luzynski < > digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt; wrote: > >> Ping! Can we have this change introduced, please? For the reminder, >> a formula like this is needed for Hebrew language globally: >> >> nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >> >> Should a ticket be filed somewhere? Thank you in advance. >> >> Rafal >> >> >> 16.09.2016 01:17 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt; wrote: >> > >> > >> > Thank you, Niv. For me it's clear that we should introduce the >> > dual number in Hebrew globally and not introduce the "many" form. >> > It will be introduced only if it turns out to be needed. >> > >> > Please note that what I write here is just my kindly suggestion, >> > not the decision. Can we ask the Zanata administrators and/or >> > developers to introduce this change, please? >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Rafal >> > >> > >> > 15.09.2016 11:23 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> > > >> > > (please ignore my last 3 messages - I was just me having trouble >> sending >> > > this >> > > message - here is the complete message) >> > > >> > > >now I'd suggest this one as more readable: >> > > > >> > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >> > > > >> > > >Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: >> > > > >> > > >msgstr[0] "Singular form" >> > > >msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" >> > > >msgstr[2] "Dual form" >> > > > >> > > >Can we have this formula for now? >> > > >> > > That's great, thank you. >> > > >> > > >Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. >> > > >You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would >> > > >be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, >> > > >using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! >> > > >> > > as using the regular plural form is correct (seem natural to the >> user*), >> > > it will only add unneeded extra complexity, >> > > so we'd prefer to leave it for now. >> > > meanwhile, >> > > projects who want can do it manipulating the .po file header (as >> GNOME >> > > Software did) >> > > for overall standard, >> > > we can always turn over the world again at later time :) >> > > >> > > >But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: >> > > >* for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... >> > > >or >> > > >* for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... >> > > the latter, for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... >> (n>10) >> > > but again, using the regular plural form is correct*. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Niv >> > > >> > > *user reading in hebrew the sentence "2 days ago" translated as >> "לפני 2 >> > > ימים" >> > > will get the filling this sentence is not natural and should be "לפני >> > > יומיים" >> > > >> > > user reading in hebrew the sentence "20 days ago" translated as >> "לפני 20 >> > > ימים" will continue reading without paying attention that the form >> "לפני 20 >> > > יום" exists as well >> > > >> > > 2016-09-15 2:19 GMT+03:00 Rafal Luzynski < >> digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com >> > > mailto:digitalfreak@lingonborough.com >: >> > > > > 14.09.2016 13:30 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com mailto: >> bloop93(a)gmail.com > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Just to make sure, >> > > > > We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other rule >> can >> > > > > be >> > > > > ignored. >> > > > > >> > > > > 0 : n==1 : singular form >> > > > > 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form >> > > > > 2 : n==2 : dual form >> > > > > >> > > > > We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be >> > > > > correct. >> > > > > >> > > > > (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward >> > > > > compatibility) >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > Niv >> > > > >> > > > As for now it looks clear to me that Hebrew language needs at least >> > > > the dual form to be added. Even if dual form usually will be the >> > > > same as the plural we need a mechanism and leave it to the >> translators >> > > > whether they use it in particular cases or not. >> > > > >> > > > Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. >> > > > You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would >> > > > be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, >> > > > using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! But for >> > > > now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: >> > > > >> > > > * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... >> > > > or >> > > > * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... >> > > > >> > > > As long as it's clear that dual number is necessary and it's >> > > > not clear whether and when the "many" number is necessary >> > > > I suggest adding the dual number rule and not adding the "many" >> > > > number yet. As far as I understood, missing dual number is >> > > > incorrect while missing "many" number is not. >> > > > >> > > > Although previously I referred to this formula: [1] >> > > > >> > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; >> > > > >> > > > now I'd suggest this one as more readable: >> > > > >> > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >> > > > >> > > > Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: >> > > > >> > > > msgstr[0] "Singular form" >> > > > msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" >> > > > msgstr[2] "Dual form" >> > > > >> > > > Can we have this formula for now? >> > > > >> > > > For the record, here [2] is a formula for Hebrew according to >> > > > what CLDR curently says: >> > > > >> > > > nplurals=4; plural=(n == 1) ? 0 : ((n == 2) ? 1 : (((n < 0 || n > >> 10) >> > > > && n % >> > > > 10 == 0) ? 2 : 3)) >> > > > >> > > > Regards, >> > > > >> > > > Rafal >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > [1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po >> > > > [2] http://mlocati.github.io/cldr-to-gettext-plural-rules/ >> > > > > -- >> > > trans mailing list >> > > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedo >> raproject.org >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > trans mailing list >> > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedo >> raproject.org >> _______________________________________________ >> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> > > > _______________________________________________ > trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

> An admin... you mean someone from Infra? Or you mean someone like Noriko? don't know, actually... someone who is able to introduce changes on Zanata. Thanks, Niv 2016-09-23 22:36 GMT+03:00 Sylvia Sánchez <lailahfsf(a)gmail.com&gt;: > Hi! > > An admin... you mean someone from Infra? Or you mean someone like > Noriko? > > > Cheers, > Sylvia > > > > On 22 September 2016 at 21:06, ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > >> Thank you Sylvia, >> Bug opened: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378576 >> >> problem is, it seems to be targeted at the Hebrew team coordinator, but >> I think an admin is needed for introducing this change) >> >> Also, thank you again Rafal, much appreciated. >> >> 2016-09-22 20:33 GMT+03:00 Sylvia Sánchez <lailahfsf(a)gmail.com&gt;: >> >>> >>> Or a bug? I think Bugzilla fits better for this. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Sylvia >>> >>> >>> >>> On 22 September 2016 at 11:33, Rafal Luzynski < >>> digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> Ping! Can we have this change introduced, please? For the reminder, >>>> a formula like this is needed for Hebrew language globally: >>>> >>>> nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >>>> >>>> Should a ticket be filed somewhere? Thank you in advance. >>>> >>>> Rafal >>>> >>>> >>>> 16.09.2016 01:17 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Thank you, Niv. For me it's clear that we should introduce the >>>> > dual number in Hebrew globally and not introduce the "many" form. >>>> > It will be introduced only if it turns out to be needed. >>>> > >>>> > Please note that what I write here is just my kindly suggestion, >>>> > not the decision. Can we ask the Zanata administrators and/or >>>> > developers to introduce this change, please? >>>> > >>>> > Regards, >>>> > >>>> > Rafal >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > 15.09.2016 11:23 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > (please ignore my last 3 messages - I was just me having trouble >>>> sending >>>> > > this >>>> > > message - here is the complete message) >>>> > > >>>> > > >now I'd suggest this one as more readable: >>>> > > > >>>> > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >>>> > > > >>>> > > >Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: >>>> > > > >>>> > > >msgstr[0] "Singular form" >>>> > > >msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" >>>> > > >msgstr[2] "Dual form" >>>> > > > >>>> > > >Can we have this formula for now? >>>> > > >>>> > > That's great, thank you. >>>> > > >>>> > > >Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. >>>> > > >You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would >>>> > > >be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, >>>> > > >using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! >>>> > > >>>> > > as using the regular plural form is correct (seem natural to the >>>> user*), >>>> > > it will only add unneeded extra complexity, >>>> > > so we'd prefer to leave it for now. >>>> > > meanwhile, >>>> > > projects who want can do it manipulating the .po file header (as >>>> GNOME >>>> > > Software did) >>>> > > for overall standard, >>>> > > we can always turn over the world again at later time :) >>>> > > >>>> > > >But for now I don't understand where the "many" form should be >>>> used: >>>> > > >* for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... >>>> > > >or >>>> > > >* for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... >>>> > > the latter, for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... >>>> (n>10) >>>> > > but again, using the regular plural form is correct*. >>>> > > >>>> > > Thanks, >>>> > > Niv >>>> > > >>>> > > *user reading in hebrew the sentence "2 days ago" translated as >>>> "לפני 2 >>>> > > ימים" >>>> > > will get the filling this sentence is not natural and should be >>>> "לפני >>>> > > יומיים" >>>> > > >>>> > > user reading in hebrew the sentence "20 days ago" translated as >>>> "לפני 20 >>>> > > ימים" will continue reading without paying attention that the form >>>> "לפני 20 >>>> > > יום" exists as well >>>> > > >>>> > > 2016-09-15 2:19 GMT+03:00 Rafal Luzynski < >>>> digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com >>>> > > mailto:digitalfreak@lingonborough.com >: >>>> > > > > 14.09.2016 13:30 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com mailto: >>>> bloop93(a)gmail.com > >>>> > > > > wrote: >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > Just to make sure, >>>> > > > > We are requesting to add the rule for dual form.. the other >>>> rule can >>>> > > > > be >>>> > > > > ignored. >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > 0 : n==1 : singular form >>>> > > > > 1 : n==0||n >2 :plural form >>>> > > > > 2 : n==2 : dual form >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > We do not actually need the many form for the translation to be >>>> > > > > correct. >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > (Assuming putting dual form on 2 can mainyain some bacward >>>> > > > > compatibility) >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > Thanks, >>>> > > > > Niv >>>> > > > >>>> > > > As for now it looks clear to me that Hebrew language needs at >>>> least >>>> > > > the dual form to be added. Even if dual form usually will be the >>>> > > > same as the plural we need a mechanism and leave it to the >>>> translators >>>> > > > whether they use it in particular cases or not. >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Now it's not clear to me what you mean about the "many" form. >>>> > > > You wrote that it is correct not to use this form but it would >>>> > > > be nicer to have it. If it would be nice then let's be nice, >>>> > > > using more plural forms is not beyond our abilities! But for >>>> > > > now I don't understand where the "many" form should be used: >>>> > > > >>>> > > > * for the numbers: 20, 30, 40, ..., 100, 110, 120, ... >>>> > > > or >>>> > > > * for the numbers: 11, 12, 13, ..., 99, 100, 101, ... >>>> > > > >>>> > > > As long as it's clear that dual number is necessary and it's >>>> > > > not clear whether and when the "many" number is necessary >>>> > > > I suggest adding the dual number rule and not adding the "many" >>>> > > > number yet. As far as I understood, missing dual number is >>>> > > > incorrect while missing "many" number is not. >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Although previously I referred to this formula: [1] >>>> > > > >>>> > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : (n>2||n==0) ? 1 : 2; >>>> > > > >>>> > > > now I'd suggest this one as more readable: >>>> > > > >>>> > > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Niv, is this order of the translated strings what you want: >>>> > > > >>>> > > > msgstr[0] "Singular form" >>>> > > > msgstr[1] "Plural form (including zero)" >>>> > > > msgstr[2] "Dual form" >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Can we have this formula for now? >>>> > > > >>>> > > > For the record, here [2] is a formula for Hebrew according to >>>> > > > what CLDR curently says: >>>> > > > >>>> > > > nplurals=4; plural=(n == 1) ? 0 : ((n == 2) ? 1 : (((n < 0 || n >>>> > 10) >>>> > > > && n % >>>> > > > 10 == 0) ? 2 : 3)) >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Regards, >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Rafal >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > [1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/po/he.po >>>> > > > [2] http://mlocati.github.io/cldr-to-gettext-plural-rules/ >>>> > > > > -- >>>> > > trans mailing list >>>> > > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedo >>>> raproject.org >>>> > > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > trans mailing list >>>> > trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/trans@lists.fedo >>>> raproject.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

2016-09-22 11:33 GMT+02:00 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com >: > Ping! Can we have this change introduced, please? For the reminder, > a formula like this is needed for Hebrew language globally: > > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; > > Should a ticket be filed somewhere? Thank you in advance. > I changed it on <https://fedora.zanata.org>;. It might be a good idea to talk to upstreams (GNOME, KDE, etc.) about changing it there as well. Best regards, -- Piotr Drąg https://piotrdrag.fedorapeople.org _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

Hey guys? Is this a global change? For all projects? On Sep 25, 2016 12:05 AM, "ניב באר" <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Thank you, reviewing now.. > > 2016-09-24 22:28 GMT+03:00 Piotr Drąg <piotrdrag(a)gmail.com&gt;: > >> 2016-09-22 11:33 GMT+02:00 Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.co >> m>: >> > Ping! Can we have this change introduced, please? For the reminder, >> > a formula like this is needed for Hebrew language globally: >> > >> > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >> > >> > Should a ticket be filed somewhere? Thank you in advance. >> > >> >> I changed it on <https://fedora.zanata.org>;. It might be a good idea >> to talk to upstreams (GNOME, KDE, etc.) about changing it there as >> well. >> >> Best regards, >> >> -- >> Piotr Drąg >> https://piotrdrag.fedorapeople.org >> _______________________________________________ >> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> > > > _______________________________________________ > trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

​I didn't mean for all languages but for all projects translated to Hebrew, I'm not sure we can handle so much work without communicating and getting the Hebrew community agreement thus applying the rules to the different projects and translators. Yaron Shahrabani <DevOps - Hebrew translator> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Sylvia Sánchez <lailahfsf(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > No, I think it's for Hebrew language only. > > > Cheers, > Sylvia > > On 25 September 2016 at 07:01, Yaron Shahrabani <sh.yaron(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > >> Hey guys? Is this a global change? For all projects? >> >> On Sep 25, 2016 12:05 AM, "ניב באר" <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> Thank you, reviewing now.. >>> >>> 2016-09-24 22:28 GMT+03:00 Piotr Drąg <piotrdrag(a)gmail.com&gt;: >>> >>>> 2016-09-22 11:33 GMT+02:00 Rafal Luzynski < >>>> digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt;: >>>> > Ping! Can we have this change introduced, please? For the reminder, >>>> > a formula like this is needed for Hebrew language globally: >>>> > >>>> > nplurals=3; plural=n==1 ? 0 : n==2 ? 2 : 1; >>>> > >>>> > Should a ticket be filed somewhere? Thank you in advance. >>>> > >>>> >>>> I changed it on <https://fedora.zanata.org>;. It might be a good idea >>>> to talk to upstreams (GNOME, KDE, etc.) about changing it there as >>>> well. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Piotr Drąg >>>> https://piotrdrag.fedorapeople.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[...] I think it will only affect projects which are not yet translated (at all)... because translated project already have the gettext header with the previous plural form definition. Can someone please verify? Niv

​I didn't mean for all languages but for all projects translated to Hebrew, I'm not sure we can handle so much work without communicating and getting the Hebrew community agreement thus applying the rules to the different projects and translators. Yaron Shahrabani

in order to not break anything I prefer to fix the header manually after I review a project. I have meanwhile managed to do it in gnome-abrt, but other projects are seem to reject the uploaded file documents that were created after the change have the right header בתאריך 28 בספט׳ 2016 00:35,‏ "Rafal Luzynski" <digitalfreak@lingonborough. com> כתב: 25.09.2016 14:57 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > [...] > > I think it will only affect projects which are not yet translated (at > all)... > > because translated project already have the gettext header with the > previous > > plural form definition. > > > > Can someone please verify? > > > > Niv > > I confirm that when viewing he.po (via the web interface or via > zanata-cli client) I can see 3 entries for each string containing > plurals (singular, plural, double) which is correct but the header > still says: "Plural-Forms: nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1);\n". > gettext package will probably get confused, zanata-cli already said: > > [WARN] Marking as fuzzy: too many plural forms for text flow: > resId=a91ffc0ca31f741b94db01803907073c, doc=gnome-abrt > > (repeated 3 times with different resId). > > Looks like it is possible to input plurals correctly but all the > headers need to be fixed. > > So, guys, can we please have all headers fixed, globally, for > Hebrew language for all projects, both future and already existing? > Or should it be done manually by translators? > > Also from another email: > > On 25 September 2016 at 08:41, Yaron Shahrabani <sh.yaron(a)gmail.com > mailto:sh.yaron@gmail.com > wrote: > > ​I didn't mean for all languages but for all projects translated to > > Hebrew, I'm not sure we can handle so much work without communicating > and > > getting the Hebrew community agreement thus applying the rules to the > > different projects and translators. > > > > Yaron Shahrabani > > I think that Niv has already volunteered to browse *all* projects > in Zanata and fix *all* plurals which need it. About 120 projects, > fortunately not all already translated - is it OK, Niv? > > Best regards, > > Rafal > _______________________________________________ > trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >

​Changing manually upon selection would be easier and faster since many projects will still look quite native without this change.​ Yaron Shahrabani <DevOps - Hebrew translator> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:50 AM, ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > my mistake, it was rejected in gnome-abrt as well > > 2016-09-28 7:57 GMT+03:00 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt;: > >> in order to not break anything I prefer to fix the header manually after >> I review a project. >> I have meanwhile managed to do it in gnome-abrt, but other projects are >> seem to reject the uploaded file >> >> documents that were created after the change have the right header >> >> בתאריך 28 בספט׳ 2016 00:35,‏ "Rafal Luzynski" < >> digitalfreak(a)lingonborough.com&gt; כתב: >> >> 25.09.2016 14:57 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> > >>> > [...] >>> > I think it will only affect projects which are not yet translated >>> (at all)... >>> > because translated project already have the gettext header with the >>> previous >>> > plural form definition. >>> > >>> > Can someone please verify? >>> > >>> > Niv >>> >>> I confirm that when viewing he.po (via the web interface or via >>> zanata-cli client) I can see 3 entries for each string containing >>> plurals (singular, plural, double) which is correct but the header >>> still says: "Plural-Forms: nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1);\n". >>> gettext package will probably get confused, zanata-cli already said: >>> >>> [WARN] Marking as fuzzy: too many plural forms for text flow: >>> resId=a91ffc0ca31f741b94db01803907073c, doc=gnome-abrt >>> >>> (repeated 3 times with different resId). >>> >>> Looks like it is possible to input plurals correctly but all the >>> headers need to be fixed. >>> >>> So, guys, can we please have all headers fixed, globally, for >>> Hebrew language for all projects, both future and already existing? >>> Or should it be done manually by translators? >>> >>> Also from another email: >>> >>> On 25 September 2016 at 08:41, Yaron Shahrabani <sh.yaron(a)gmail.com >>> mailto:sh.yaron@gmail.com > wrote: >>> > ​I didn't mean for all languages but for all projects translated >>> to >>> > Hebrew, I'm not sure we can handle so much work without communicating >>> and >>> > getting the Hebrew community agreement thus applying the rules to the >>> > different projects and translators. >>> > >>> > Yaron Shahrabani >>> >>> I think that Niv has already volunteered to browse *all* projects >>> in Zanata and fix *all* plurals which need it. About 120 projects, >>> fortunately not all already translated - is it OK, Niv? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rafal >>> _______________________________________________ >>> trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > _______________________________________________ trans mailing list -- trans(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to trans-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

Hi, 29.09.2016 20:53 ניב באר <bloop93(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > update: it seems updating the .po header is possible when uploading through > cli, > but only for project with only one document. > project with multiple documents have them overriding each other Guys, what is the current status of this issue? Have you managed to fix plural rules for Hebrew in all projects in Zanata, or at least in all projects you wanted to be fixed? Do you need more assistance? Regards, Rafal