Skip to content

misc: Add pt_BR translation #3872

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 2, 2025

Conversation

fgmacedo
Copy link
Contributor

Context

Adding Brazilian Portuguese (pt_BR) translation.

Related to getlago/lago-front#2283

Copy link
Contributor

@diegocharles diegocharles left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This translation is very accurate. I just recommended to keep the API Key term because it's a standard concept name for the Brazilian developers.
What do you think?

@fgmacedo fgmacedo force-pushed the macedo/translation-pt-br branch from bde7fd9 to c603deb Compare June 27, 2025 14:50
@ansmonjol ansmonjol changed the title Adding pt_BR translation misc: Add pt_BR translation Jul 2, 2025
@ansmonjol ansmonjol merged commit d97be25 into getlago:main Jul 2, 2025
10 checks passed
@fgmacedo fgmacedo deleted the macedo/translation-pt-br branch July 2, 2025 12:39
julienbourdeau added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2025
When updating locale files, you must run `i18n-tasks` to clean up the
file.

See community PR #3872
diegocharles pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2025
## Context

Adding Brazilian Portuguese (pt_BR) translation.

Related to getlago/lago-front#2283

---------

Co-authored-by: Alexandre Monjol <alexandre.monjol@gmail.com>
diegocharles pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2025
When updating locale files, you must run `i18n-tasks` to clean up the
file.

See community PR #3872
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants