From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, pgsql-translators@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: more message fixes
In-reply-to: <20190515183005.GA26486@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20190515183005.GA26486@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Wed, 15 May 2019 14:30:05 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <17812.1557956881.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 17:48:01 -0400
Message-ID: <17813.1557956881@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Here's a bunch of message fixes in the postgres.po module.  Please
> comment if anything seems amiss.

These sorts of changes trouble me a bit from a translatability standpoint:

-                     errmsg("connect =3D false and enabled =3D true are m=
utually exclusive options")));
+                     errmsg("%s and %s are mutually exclusive options",
+                            "connect =3D false", "enabled =3D true")));

-                        (errmsg("CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT ... USE_SNAPSHOT=
 "
-                                "must not be called in a subtransaction")=
));
+                        (errmsg("%s must not be called in a subtransactio=
n",
+                                "CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT ... USE_SNAPSHOT=
")));

A translator might expect the %s's to represent single words.
I think at least you'd want a translator: comment to warn about
what the insertion will be.

+            /* XXX is it okay to use %d for BlockNumber everywhere? */

BlockNumber should be %u, no?

			regards, tom lane