[hgbook] Italian version available

[Paolo Berto]

I think the terminology should be the *exact same* used by the english  
version of mercurial.
So merge is merge, and "fare un merge" is correct from my point of  
view ("fare una unione" would be confusing from the usability side).
All commands names should stay the same, and such names should be  
referenced across the text with original naming.

Then, where and when you explain what merge does, you can rely on our  
beautiful language for the translation and you can use names and  
synonyms at your please.

Also from my perspective it makes no sense o translate the output of a  
command in italian, like in this case:

> changeset:   0:0a04b987be5a
> utente: mpm at selenic.com
> data: Fri Aug 26 01:20:50 2005 -0700
> sommario: Crea il classico programma "ciao, mondo".


Anyhow, good work!

P.


---
paolo berto
heqd of visual research
the /*jupiter jazz*/ group
www.jupiter-jazz.com




On Sep 7, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Stefano Tortarolo wrote:

> Hi! Great job! Just a couple of notes...
>
> 2009/9/6 Giulio Piancastelli <giulio.piancastelli at gmail.com>:
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 8:49 PM, marco  
>> gaddoni<marco.gaddoni at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> i found a little strange to read the
>>> translation of merge as "unione"
>>> (the svnbook uses "fusione").
>>
>> Indeed, I've checked the SVN book before deciding upon the
>> translation, but I liked the term "unione" better.
>
> I think we should stick with terms already adopted, 'fusione' is weird
> but if svnbook uses it maybe we should use it as well.
> By the way, speaking with other italians I always use 'merge/fare il  
> merge'.
> Moreover, I just took a quick glance and if I'm not wrong you use
> terms as 'changeset'.
>
>>> i don't know what is better.
>>
>> I think "unione" is somehow more "plain", "neutral" perhaps, also
>> "mathematical" rather than "physical", so I found it to be more apt  
>> to
>> the case. Also, I prefer the verbal form "unire" to "fondere", where
>> the differences I tried to explain are even stronger.
>
> I agree with you, but see above...
>
>>> Did you consider putting the english
>>>  term next to the italian one for the
>>> tecnical words?
>
> I second this, a lot of users use only the english terms.
>
>> Sometimes I did (not just considered, I mean), but typically on the
>> first occurrence of the word. As far as "merge" is concerned, the
>> first (albeit verbal) occurrence happens in Chapter 1. See the third
>> paragraph in http://gpiancastelli.altervista.org/hgbook-it/read/come-siamo-arrivati-qui.html#id399720 
>> .
>> Other times I thought that the book text combined with the examples
>> from the command line was already clear, so that the reader would not
>> be surprised or confused (e.g. pull as "estrarre" and push as
>> "trasmettere" in Chapter 2).
>
> In the current hg translation I used 'fare pull/fare push', why don't
> we try to agree upon a common terminology?
>
> Stefano
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial