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

fix(devtools): fix the import_messages script #1673

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

sbruens
Copy link
Contributor

@sbruens sbruens commented Jul 21, 2023

Fixing the import_messages script ready to be expanded to allow us to write localization files for the Catalyst app on iOS.

@sbruens sbruens requested review from a team as code owners July 21, 2023 14:35
@sbruens sbruens changed the title Fixing the import_messages script fix(devtools): Fix the import_messages script Jul 21, 2023
@sbruens sbruens changed the title fix(devtools): Fix the import_messages script fix(devtools): fix the import_messages script Jul 21, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 21, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (317e8f6) 36% compared to head (691910d) 36%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #1673   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage      36%     36%           
======================================
  Files          45      45           
  Lines        2756    2756           
  Branches      312     312           
======================================
  Hits         1006    1006           
  Misses       1750    1750           
Flag Coverage Δ
apple 14% <ø> (ø)
ios 15% <ø> (ø)
macos 14% <ø> (ø)
unittests 36% <ø> (ø)
www 45% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we generate these at build time instead? That would ensure they are always in sync with the messages.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I was thinking about this as well. Will take a look at that in a follow-up - was going to make some adjustments incrementally.

Do we still want a copy of these files checked-in as well or completely remove them from the repo?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In that case we should remove the generated files from the repo.

I'll let @daniellacosse review this PR.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I pointed Sander to this old PR I never got around to finishing: #1508

The plan is to get this into node first, then I'll add it to the build and delete the files in a subsequent PR.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Alright I'll abandon this in favor of #1674.

@sbruens
Copy link
Contributor Author

sbruens commented Jul 21, 2023

Closing in favor of #1674

@sbruens sbruens closed this Jul 21, 2023
@sbruens sbruens deleted the sbruens/l10n branch July 21, 2023 19:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants