You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Typically the main branch would be English, and everything else would follow from that. A French (say) translator would want to see the EN -> EN' diff to work out what corresponding FR -> FR' change to make in their branch.
Is this even a good idea? (Regardless of whether it is or not, I'd be interested to hear answers to the first question!)
I don't think branches are the right tool for the job. The git graph is about an evolution that diverges and converges, and branches are a handle onto that. It's more specific than just different flavors of something related.
I'm still skeptical that it's definitively the right way, and storing entirely different content on different branches makes me uneasy, but they're never intended to (re)converge, which makes me think it's actually fine. The branches will all share the same file structure.
Doesn't sound like it was a disaster. The merge conflicts corresponding to a need for a new translation is what I hoped for. I think I'm missing a convenient way to see all new content which would need translating. Maybe a merge hook.
A translation is hardly ever 1-to-1, also in the sense that a change in the original material may resultv in changing the translation all over the place. Usually it's better to wait with the translation for the release of the original and then do it for the whole text at once.
I'm fixing that exact problem in another way... ;)
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
