(In reply to Francesco Lodolo [:flod] from comment #1)
(In reply to Matjaz Horvat [:mathjazz] from comment #0)
That works fine in the translate view of the locale the pinned comment has been posted in, but not in translate views of other locales.
Did you mean it the other way around? It looks weird in the locale where the original discussion was, because it's duplicated.
Actually I meant it the way I wrote it. :) Why do you think duplicating the comment wouldn't be confusing on the translate views of other locales?
The idea behind duplicating the comments in both sections was that it allows you to see the important (pinned) comments first, and then check how the conversation evolved in chronological order under the All comments section of the locale where the original discussion took place. Moving the pinned comments out of that section (as opposed to copying) makes the discussion harder to follow and confusing.
I normally rewrite the comment with the explicit purpose of pinning, so it makes sense as stand-alone. This one was temporary and the string was already translated by all locales, so I didn't bother.
Interesting. I haven't seen pinned comments being used that way outside the example you gave, but I understand the motivation. If you plan to use pinned comments like this, then it obviously makes no sense to repeat them.
Also, based on the data we now have (7 pinned comments :-)), it doesn't seem like we'll be having a lot of discussions after the comment gets pinned, which would indeed be less confusing if the pinned comment was repeated.
I suppose you wouldn't mind dropping the section titles (Pinned comments, All comments) as part of changing the behavior of pinned comments?