Thanks @lucydodo. 😄

The HTTP and Socks v5 entries appear to be empty. Is that correct?

You are welcome.
I thought about HTML and Socks v5 are not need to translate. so I just processed to done.

I'm feeling unsure about those HTML and Socks v5 entries. Let's ask some of our other translators, just to be safe. 😄

@mgrojo @sqlitebrowser/translators If an entry doesn't need translation, is giving it an empty field the standard approach?

Safe is important! I agree your opinion.
I will wait for comments from other contributors. Thank you.

I usually copy the original text over in such cases (when the original and translated text match) - in fact it should not matter for the final application (except when marking the empty translations as "finished"). While there does not seem to be any special attention on translation progress/coverage, empty/left out translations will probably still be reported as "incomplete" during the build.

@FriedrichFroebel Thanks for good comment.
@justinclift if so, what about I close this pull request and then request the pull by refer to the comment?

@lucydodo You should be safe to just push the missing translations to the translation-ko_KR branch of your fork with another commit. GitHub will update your PR with the new commit automatically, i.e. the new commit will show up here.

@FriedrichFroebel Thanks for the advice. Following your advice, I will proceed without closing this pull request for safety.

It seems like you accidentally pushed the Polish translation file to the Korean translation file with your latest commit.

I'm really sorry about that. I will fix that quickly.

After re-modify, double checked and committed. I'm really sorry to bother you.
and, I am afraid that my mistake will complicate the versioning flow.

Awesome, this looks good now, so merging it. 😄

@FriedrichFroebel Thanks heaps for jumping in here. 😄

@lucydodo The extra commits are no problem, there's a button here in the GitHub user interface which allows for simplifying them while I do the merge. It's really easy for me. 😄

If an entry doesn't need translation, is giving it an empty field the standard approach?

@justinclift I think it is better this way, even though I am certain I have copied-and-pasted original strings more than once by now.

The reason why I say it is better to leave the translation empty is that otherwise it might not be instantly clear for a translator/reviewer whether or not a string was changed slightly or just replicated. It also seems to violate the DRY principle.

Maybe eventually doing a search-and-replace for translations identical to the original string and replacing them by the empty string would be a good idea.

Ahhh. I was more worried that having a blank entry there would mean Qt uses an empty string for the translation. Sounds like it's smarter than that though. 😄