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

CKFinder translations are needed #57

Open
AnnaTomanek opened this issue Mar 3, 2016 · 2 comments
Open

CKFinder translations are needed #57

AnnaTomanek opened this issue Mar 3, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@AnnaTomanek
Copy link
Contributor

I am creating this issue to make it possible for contributors to just follow/subscribe to one thread and not be bothered with getting notifications about anything that happens in this repository.

The status as of today is that CKFinder 3.3 is due to be released in the next few weeks, we are looking forward to contributions!

Thanks a lot for your help!

This was referenced Mar 3, 2016
@skacurt
Copy link
Contributor

skacurt commented May 29, 2016

The new CKEditor is so cool.
I have just completed Turkish translation from scratch and made a pull request.
You know, context is essential for a translation job.
I tried to do as best as I can but due to limitations of DEMO version I could not test some of dialogs and captions.
You can at least provide a generic license that compatible with the localhost domain name for the translators like me who care the context and want to translate interactively.

@AnnaTomanek
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you again for your help with the Turkish translation - a great job indeed!

We fully understand and appreciate willingness to have as much context as possible when working on translations, however, up till now we had no feedback about the demo limitations being a serious obstacle for translating. Could you perhaps give us any examples of particular strings that would be easier to figure out with a locally installed full CKFinder version?

At the moment it seems to us that providing a free license on request (which we are always willing to do for someone who wants to help) is still a better idea, license-wise.

Once again - thanks for your feedback and help!

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants