Skip to content

chore(ui): refresh control ui locales - #141479

Merged
openclaw-mantis[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
automation/control-ui-locale-refresh
Sep 7, 2026
Merged

chore(ui): refresh control ui locales#141479
openclaw-mantis[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
automation/control-ui-locale-refresh

Conversation

@openclaw-mantis

@openclaw-mantis openclaw-mantis Bot commented Sep 7, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What Problem This Solves

Keeps generated Control UI locales synchronized without bypassing protected-branch checks.

Why This Change Was Made

The Control UI Locale Refresh workflow generated this update from 2c31287b83262e0720c1b6b6b3b49941b62edcaf and published it through a reviewable automation branch.

User Impact

No direct user-facing change beyond refreshed translations.

Evidence

@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Sep 7, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🦞👀
ClawSweeper picked this up.

Pull request received. I will update this pull request when review starts.

ClawSweeper review complete

ClawSweeper finished reviewing this revision. The review result is being finalized.

View the workflow run.

@openclaw-mantis
openclaw-mantis Bot enabled auto-merge (squash) September 7, 2026 19:17
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added P3 Low-priority cleanup, docs, polish, ergonomics, or speculative work. rating: 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR readiness with ordinary maintainer review expected. status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. labels Sep 7, 2026
@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Sep 7, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed September 7, 2026, 3:41 PM ET / 19:41 UTC.

ClawSweeper review

What this changes

Refreshes Control UI translations and catalog metadata for Gateway connection settings, Gateway switching prompts, and fallback-model selection.

Merge readiness

✅ Ready for maintainer review

This remains a useful generated locale refresh: current main retains older catalog metadata, and no blocking defect was found. The repository’s generated-PR publisher owns its freshness and landing.

Priority: P3
Reviewed head: 1682e5f9285ed21495d685580716f9c5b6912c51

Review scores

Measure Result What it means
Overall readiness 🐚 platinum hermit (4/6) A focused generated refresh with consistent catalog data, successful locale checks, and no blocking findings.
Proof confidence 🌊 off-meta tidepool Not applicable: This repository-managed bot refresh is exempt from contributor runtime proof; supplied locale checks support catalog validity but do not establish browser rendering.
Patch quality 🐚 platinum hermit (4/6) No actionable review findings were identified.

Verification

Check Result Evidence
Real behavior Not applicable Not applicable: This repository-managed bot refresh is exempt from contributor runtime proof; supplied locale checks support catalog validity but do not establish browser rendering.
Evidence reviewed 6 items Applicable locale policy: Read root AGENTS.md and ui/AGENTS.md fully. The scoped policy assigns generated translation memory to the serialized locale-refresh workflow and its isolated generated PR. No maintainer-notes directory was present.
Introduced catalog content: Inspected the pinned base-to-head translation changes across all locales. Read-only JSON analysis found 6,629 unique keys per locale, matching metadata, zero recorded fallbacks, matching English source hashes, and no placeholder mismatches. Translations whose English text remained unchanged were preserved.
Production consumption boundary: The existing Vite locale loader reads translation memory, materializes it against the English catalog, and emits JSON-serialized locale modules. This PR changes generated data without changing that loader, authentication logic, or stored user settings.
Findings None None.
Security None None.

How this fits together

The Control UI builds translated interface text from English catalogs and generated translation memory. The locale loader supplies that text to settings, dialogs, and other browser views.

flowchart LR
  A[English catalogs] --> B[Locale refresh workflow]
  B --> C[Translation memory]
  C --> D[Locale bundle generation]
  A --> D
  D --> E[Browser locale loader]
  E --> F[Translated interface]
Loading

Before merge

None.

Agent review details

Security

None.

PR surface

Source +218. Total +218 across 41 files.

View PR surface stats
Area Files Added Removed Net
Source 41 761 543 +218
Tests 0 0 0 0
Docs 0 0 0 0
Config 0 0 0 0
Generated 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0
Total 41 761 543 +218

Review metrics

Metric Value Why it matters
Locale key coverage 31 added and 15 retired keys per locale; 0 recorded fallbacks The generated catalogs follow the updated English interface without changing translations for unchanged source text.

Technical review

Best possible solution:

Keep translations synchronized through the existing generated-catalog workflow and its strict validation gate.

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

Not applicable: this PR synchronizes generated translations rather than reporting a runtime defect; catalog consistency was checked without executing repository code.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes. The branch uses the existing canonical translation-memory pipeline and follows the scoped policy for generated locale updates.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning medium; reviewed against bc79a198dc0d.

Labels

Label justifications:

  • P3: This is routine generated translation maintenance with no demonstrated runtime regression.
  • rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
  • status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This repository-managed bot refresh is exempt from contributor runtime proof; supplied locale checks support catalog validity but do not establish browser rendering.

Evidence

What I checked:

  • Applicable locale policy: Read root AGENTS.md and ui/AGENTS.md fully. The scoped policy assigns generated translation memory to the serialized locale-refresh workflow and its isolated generated PR. No maintainer-notes directory was present. (ui/AGENTS.md:5, 1682e5f9285e)
  • Introduced catalog content: Inspected the pinned base-to-head translation changes across all locales. Read-only JSON analysis found 6,629 unique keys per locale, matching metadata, zero recorded fallbacks, matching English source hashes, and no placeholder mismatches. Translations whose English text remained unchanged were preserved. (ui/src/i18n/.i18n/de.meta.json:5, 1682e5f9285e)
  • Production consumption boundary: The existing Vite locale loader reads translation memory, materializes it against the English catalog, and emits JSON-serialized locale modules. This PR changes generated data without changing that loader, authentication logic, or stored user settings. (ui/config/control-ui-locales.ts:41, 1682e5f9285e)
  • Still needed on current main: Fetched main retains the older German metadata hash and 6,613 keys, while the PR records 6,629. English catalogs and locale-loading owners have no differences between fetched main and this head. Release-tag blob inspection was unavailable, so no shipped-version claim is made. (ui/src/i18n/.i18n/de.meta.json:5, bc79a198dc0d)
  • Feature-history routing: Current-main history identifies Peter Steinberger’s recent locale-loader work and Ayaan Zaidi’s source-only locale bootstrap work as relevant routing context. Exact source-line introduction could not be verified because required historical blobs were unavailable. (ui/config/control-ui-locales.ts, bc79a198dc0d)
  • Validation and review continuity: Provided current-head checks include successful control-ui-i18n and UI test lanes; other checks remain incomplete. The previous completed review recorded no findings or published rank-up moves. Its earlier head was unavailable for comparison. Local diff whitespace validation passed, and the checkout remained clean; no target code or tests were executed. (1682e5f9285e)

Likely related people:

  • Peter Steinberger: Suggested for follow-up; no historical authorship or introduction is verified. (role: unverified routing candidate; confidence: low)
  • Ayaan Zaidi: Suggested for follow-up; no historical authorship or introduction is verified. (role: unverified routing candidate; confidence: low)

Rating scale

Score Internal tier Crab rank Meaning
6/6 S 🦀 challenger crab Exceptional readiness
5/6 A 🦞 diamond lobster Very strong readiness
4/6 B 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR; ordinary maintainer review
3/6 C 🦐 gold shrimp Useful, but confidence is limited
2/6 D 🦪 silver shellfish Proof or implementation needs work
1/6 F 🧂 unranked krab Not merge-ready
N/A NA 🌊 off-meta tidepool Rating does not apply

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality.
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.

Workflow

  • 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.

History

Review history (1 earlier review cycle)
  • reviewed 2026-09-07T19:23:04.396Z sha f4bdd9550098bf295980fd2aeee9741f1a6b2d43 :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none

@clawsweeper
clawsweeper Bot force-pushed the automation/control-ui-locale-refresh branch from f4bdd95 to 1682e5f Compare September 7, 2026 19:33
@openclaw-mantis
openclaw-mantis Bot merged commit ca10e17 into main Sep 7, 2026
124 checks passed
@openclaw-mantis
openclaw-mantis Bot deleted the automation/control-ui-locale-refresh branch September 7, 2026 19:42
github-actions Bot added a commit to Desicool/openclaw that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2026
@openclaw-mantis @github-actions
chore(ui): refresh control ui locales (openclaw#141479)
79072f0 
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

app: web-ui App: web-ui P3 Low-priority cleanup, docs, polish, ergonomics, or speculative work. rating: 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR readiness with ordinary maintainer review expected. size: XL status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

0 participants