openSUSE / agama / 8813862879

72%

Build Type

push

github

Committed by web-flow

Commit Message

Fixed wrongly used plural form (#1166)

## Problem

- Merging the translation from Weblate failed with
  ```
web/po/ca.po:836: number of format specifications in 'msgid_plural' and
'msgstr[0]' does not match
web/po/ca.po:848: number of format specifications in 'msgid_plural' and
'msgstr[0]' does not match

web/po/ca.po:8[5](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/actions/runs/8797558854/job/24142706299#step:9:6)9:
number of format specifications in 'msgid_plural' and 'msgstr[0]' does
not match
web/po/ca.po:872: number of format specifications in 'msgid_plural' and
'msgstr[0]' does not match
  msgfmt: found 4 fatal errors
  ```
- See
https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/actions/runs/8797558854/job/24142706299#step:9:10

## Details

There are actually two problems.

### Building Translated Texts

Building translated strings should be avoided. Example:

```
const vg = _("Logical Volume Manager (LVM) volume group");
if (...) {return sprintf(n_( "Install in a new %1$s..."), vg)};
if (...) {return sprintf(n_( "Install in a new %1$s..."), vg)};
```

The problem is that the translator does not see the whole text and the
translated parts then might not fit well together.
Another problem is that the text around might change the context and the
injected message might need a different translation. But in this case
that is not possible.

It is better to always use the full texts. It might seem annoying to
have several similar strings but more important is that the translator
has full control for the final text and each of them can be translated
slightly differently if needed.

### Wrongly Used Plural Form

This is a more serious problem. The code displays a different text for
LVM with a single PV and a different text for LVM with multiple PV. That
makes sense, if there is one PV we can display it in the text, but there
can be a dozen of PVs and then the text would be too long.

But the problem is that it used a gettext plu... (continued)

Run Details

1847 of 2696 branches covered (68.51%)

Branch coverage included in aggregate %.

2 of 14 new or added lines in 1 file covered. (14.29%)

17 existing lines in 2 files now uncovered.

18267 of 24193 relevant lines covered (75.51%)

31.5 hits per line