Skip to content

Add native Polish localization support#1253

Open
Yuxin-Qiao wants to merge 9 commits into
steipete:mainfrom
Yuxin-Qiao:feat/polish-native-localization
Open

Add native Polish localization support#1253
Yuxin-Qiao wants to merge 9 commits into
steipete:mainfrom
Yuxin-Qiao:feat/polish-native-localization

Conversation

@Yuxin-Qiao

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • add Polish (pl) as a selectable app language
  • add pl.lproj/Localizable.strings for native Polish localization
  • add language_polish label across existing locales
  • improve Polish translations for key user-facing UI (General/Display/Advanced, quota warnings, status/debug text)

Testing

  • ran localization-focused swift test targets
  • in this environment, SwiftPM expanded into a large full build graph; final pass/fail summary was not captured

@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented May 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex review: needs real behavior proof before merge. Reviewed June 11, 2026, 1:36 PM ET / 17:36 UTC.

Summary
Review failed before ClawSweeper could summarize the requested change.

Reproducibility: unclear. The review failed before ClawSweeper could establish a reproduction path.

Review metrics: none identified.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Proof: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Patch quality: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Result: rating does not apply to this item.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Risk before merge

  • [P1] No close action taken because the review did not complete.

Maintainer options:

  1. Decide the mitigation before merge
    Retry the Codex review after fixing the execution failure.
  2. Pause or close
    Do not merge this PR until maintainers decide whether the risk is worth taking.

Next step before merge

  • [P1] Review did not complete, so no work-lane recommendation was made.
Review details

Best possible solution:

Retry the Codex review after fixing the execution failure.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Unclear. The review failed before ClawSweeper could establish a reproduction path.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Unclear. Retry the review first so ClawSweeper can evaluate the actual issue and fix direction.

AGENTS.md: unclear because the file could not be read completely.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 3c2d23d1739a.

Label changes

Label changes:

  • remove P2: Current review triage priority is none.
  • remove merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility: Current PR review selected no merge-risk labels.

Label justifications:

  • rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool: Overall readiness is 🌊 off-meta tidepool; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🌊 off-meta tidepool.
Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

  • failure reason: retryable codex transport failure.
  • codex failure detail: Codex review failed for this PR with exit 1.
  • codex stderr: itle" = "Почніть із входу";\n "start_at_login_subtitle" = "Автоматично відкриває CodexBar під час запуску Mac.";\n "show_cost_summary" = "Показати підсумок витрат";".
  • codex stdout: No stdout captured.

Likely related people:

  • unknown: Codex failed before it could trace repository history. (role: review did not complete; confidence: low)
What the crustacean ranks mean
  • 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
  • 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
  • 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
  • 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
  • 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
  • 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
  • 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

How this review workflow works
  • ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
  • Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
  • A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
  • PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
  • Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
  • Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
  • Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
  • Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 545c87d4ab

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +1 to +6
/* English localization for CodexBar (base/fallback) */

" providers" = " providers";
"(System)" = "(System)";
"30d" = "30d";
"A managed Codex login is already running. Wait for it to finish before adding " = "A managed Codex login is already running. Wait for it to finish before adding ";

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Translate the Polish strings before enabling Polish

When users select the new Polish language, localizedBundle() will load this pl.lproj file, but the file is still mostly the English/base table (864 of 1029 entries match English, starting with the provider/login/account strings here). That makes the newly advertised Polish option render large parts of the app in English rather than Polish; translate these entries before shipping the language option.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🧂 unranked krab Not merge-ready due to missing proof or serious correctness/safety concerns. status: 📣 needs proof The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. P2 Normal priority bug or improvement with limited blast radius. merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility 🚨 Merging this PR could break existing users, config, migrations, defaults, or upgrades. labels May 31, 2026
@Yuxin-Qiao

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@clawsweeper re-review

Addressed in latest commits (c87caae, 891fd90), with additional Polish localization updates across key user-facing surfaces.

Proof (Polish selected in app)

1) Menu popup (core usage card + actions)

ABF7A6B1-97F4-4A90-ADAB-3A67B6462012

2) General settings pane

05E3127A-3371-4355-A166-CCD7D572D84A

3) Providers pane

C9BDD9C6-E59A-4F84-A3DB-00B3FBDCFA19

4) Display settings pane

5C15844C-1C1D-457C-847A-9B4D2996072E

5) Advanced settings pane

6AA402A5-2FA3-4983-915D-9AE53D6B45EC

Notes

  • Polish is explicitly selected.
  • Updated many remaining menu/chart/action strings that previously fell back to English.
  • Hidden is still intentionally left as-is for now (tracked separately).

@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Jun 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🦞🧹
ClawSweeper re-review requested.

I asked ClawSweeper to review this item again.
Action: item re-review queued (workflow sweep.yml, event repository_dispatch).
Result: the existing ClawSweeper review comment will be edited in place when the review finishes.

Re-review progress:

@Yuxin-Qiao Yuxin-Qiao changed the title Add native Polish app language support Add native Polish localization support Jun 1, 2026
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added proof: sufficient Contributor real behavior proof is sufficient. proof: 📸 screenshot Contributor real behavior proof includes screenshot evidence. status: ⏳ waiting on author ClawSweeper has contributor-facing work open and is waiting for author action. and removed status: 📣 needs proof The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. labels Jun 1, 2026
@Yuxin-Qiao Yuxin-Qiao force-pushed the feat/polish-native-localization branch 2 times, most recently from 034add6 to d948204 Compare June 7, 2026 13:20
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🦐 gold shrimp Decent PR readiness signal, but merge confidence is limited. and removed rating: 🧂 unranked krab Not merge-ready due to missing proof or serious correctness/safety concerns. labels Jun 7, 2026
@Yuxin-Qiao Yuxin-Qiao force-pushed the feat/polish-native-localization branch from f949d99 to 25ac8f2 Compare June 11, 2026 07:04
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool PR readiness rating does not apply to this item. and removed proof: sufficient Contributor real behavior proof is sufficient. proof: 📸 screenshot Contributor real behavior proof includes screenshot evidence. rating: 🦐 gold shrimp Decent PR readiness signal, but merge confidence is limited. status: ⏳ waiting on author ClawSweeper has contributor-facing work open and is waiting for author action. labels Jun 11, 2026
@steipete steipete force-pushed the feat/polish-native-localization branch from 25ac8f2 to 618ebe6 Compare June 11, 2026 15:08
@steipete

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Rebased and updated the PR head to 618ebe62.

Completed:

  • rebased onto current main
  • restored exact English/Polish catalog key parity: 1038/1038 keys
  • translated five keys added or renamed since the original branch
  • added the unreleased changelog credit
  • focused localization/UI tests: 9 passed
  • make check: clean

Autoreview found one remaining merge blocker: 814 of 1038 Polish values are still exact English placeholders, leaving only 224 translated entries. Existing selectable non-English catalogs have roughly 990 or more translated values. This PR should stay open until the Polish catalog is substantially complete and native-quality; I am not auto-merging it in the current state.

Yuxin Qiao added 3 commits June 12, 2026 00:31
- Add 'language_polish' to languageKeys in LocalizationLanguageCatalogTests
  so the new case in AppLanguage matches the test's expected key set.
- Add 'language_polish' entry to fr/nl/uk/vi lproj (the four lproj
  added to main after the original Polish PR was opened) so the
  per-catalog coverage check passes.
- Add missing language_french/dutch/ukrainian/vietnamese to pl.lproj
  with Polish translations so pl.lproj is also covered by the test.
…talogs)

After rebasing onto origin/main, the invariant test
'localized catalogs include every app language label' requires every
lproj to contain every language_<X> key. Add language_japanese to
pl.lproj and language_polish to ja.lproj.

No-op for app behavior; only catalog parity for invariant.
@Yuxin-Qiao Yuxin-Qiao force-pushed the feat/polish-native-localization branch from 618ebe6 to 86fa43c Compare June 11, 2026 16:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility 🚨 Merging this PR could break existing users, config, migrations, defaults, or upgrades. P2 Normal priority bug or improvement with limited blast radius. rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool PR readiness rating does not apply to this item.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants