Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[META] Improve internationalization in 1.x #3369

Open
8 of 15 tasks
herbdool opened this issue Nov 5, 2018 · 5 comments
Open
8 of 15 tasks

[META] Improve internationalization in 1.x #3369

herbdool opened this issue Nov 5, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@herbdool
Copy link

herbdool commented Nov 5, 2018

There are a number of improvements we can make in 1.x that are backwards compatible (items in bold are prioritised):

Misc:

@docwilmot
Copy link
Contributor

@herbdool I wonder if this should be more about the total i18n experience in Backdropland rather than just core. Should we be making an effort to ensure that all the needed bits are available? At the very least that might give us a broader view of what might be lacking.

So, the translation files, the localization server, contrib modules etc?

@herbdool
Copy link
Author

herbdool commented Nov 9, 2018

@docwilmot perhaps that could be a meta to this meta. I was thinking first of focusing on core and 1.x but I'm flexible. We also have "projects" in github which are pretty useful for tracking the progress on issues so this could be multiple issues as part of a Internationalization project.

@olafgrabienski
Copy link

I like to focus on core / 1.x in this issue. Doing so, I expect to also get an image of the (hopefully few) tasks that need to be done in contrib and infrastructure.

Some issues are even connected, take for instance the Backdrop localization server: At the moment, during a Backdrop installation in a language other than English, people get a link to the Drupal localization server. If we want to improve the installation experience, we have to have our own localization server, so it's (also) a core issue.

@docwilmot
Copy link
Contributor

docwilmot commented Nov 9, 2018

@olafgrabienski thats my point. we should add the server issues to this META, because it is a 'core' issue then.

@olafgrabienski
Copy link

@herbdool I've added one issue to the description:

There are two PRs for the issue but it's still unclear what's the best way to proceed. Would be great if you could have a look at it and give some feedback!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants