Developers live in Git. Pull requests, branches, commits, code review—the entire workflow centers on version control. Then localization happens, and suddenly there’s a disconnect: export files, upload to translation platform, wait, download, commit back to repo.

This handoff process is where localization breaks down for developer-driven products.

The developer localization friction

Typical developer-localization workflow:

1. Developer changes string in code
2. Someone remembers to export strings to translation platform
3. Translation platform processes the change
4. Someone remembers to download translations
5. Developer commits translations back to repo
6. Repeat for every change, in every branch

The “someone remembers” steps are where things break. Strings get changed but not translated. Translations complete but don’t make it back to the repo. Branches diverge with different translation states.

For products shipping regularly, this friction compounds into perpetually out-of-sync translations.

Git-native localization

The alternative: localization that operates through Git directly.

Source files in repo. String files (JSON, YAML, .properties, XLIFF) live in the repository as source of truth.

Automated sync. When source files change, translation platform pulls changes automatically.

Translation workflow. Translators work in translation tools designed for the job—TM, glossaries, QA, AI assistance.

Automated return. Completed translations commit back to the repo, creating PRs or pushing directly as configured.

Branch awareness. Translation tracks per-branch, merging translations when branches merge.

Developers interact with translation through Git. They don’t need to learn translation platforms or manage file handoffs.

How Git sync works

The integration operates through Git hooks and APIs:

Webhook triggers. Repo changes trigger the translation platform via webhooks. When a commit touches string files, sync initiates.

File detection. The platform identifies which files are localizable—based on path patterns, file extensions, or explicit configuration.

Content extraction. Translatable strings are extracted from source files for translation.

Translation processing. New and changed strings translate via configured workflow (TM, MT, human, AI).

PR or commit. Translations return to the repo. This can create a pull request for review or commit directly to a translations branch.

Merge handling. When branches merge in the repo, translation state merges correspondingly.

Branch workflow support

Real development happens in branches. Feature branches, release branches, hotfix branches—each may have string changes.

Git-aware localization tracks branches:

Per-branch tracking. Changes in feature/new-dashboard are translated in context of that branch.

Merge intelligence. When feature/new-dashboard merges to main, translations for new strings come along.

Conflict handling. If the same string changes differently in two branches, the conflict surfaces clearly.

Release branch focus. Prioritize translation for branches nearing release.

This matches how developers work, not how traditional localization works.

Continuous localization

For products with frequent releases, continuous localization means translation keeps pace with development:

Change detection. New and modified strings identified immediately upon commit.

Prioritized queuing. Changes queue for translation based on priority—user-facing strings before logging messages.

Automated translation. Machine translation or AI provides initial translations instantly.

Review routing. Human review happens in parallel, improving automated translations.

Continuous delivery. Translations deploy when approved, without waiting for batch releases.

The result: localization latency drops from days or weeks to hours or minutes.

Developer experience

Developers shouldn’t need to understand translation workflows. The ideal developer experience:

No manual exports. Commit string changes; translation happens automatically.

No manual imports. Translations appear in the repo without developer action.

Status visibility. Clear indication of translation coverage and status for any branch.

PR integration. Translation status shows in pull requests—is this change fully translated?

CI integration. Build pipeline can require translation completion before merge or release.

Translation becomes part of the development infrastructure, not a separate workflow to manage.

File format handling

Developer projects use various string formats:

JSON. Common for web apps, React, Vue, Angular. YAML. Popular for Ruby, Python, configuration-heavy projects. .properties. Java and JVM languages. XLIFF. Standard localization format, sometimes used directly. PO/POT. gettext format for C, Python, PHP. strings/stringsdict. iOS/macOS localization. XML resources. Android localization.

Git-aware localization must handle whichever formats the project uses, extracting strings correctly and writing translations back in valid format.

Context preservation

Developers write code context that helps translation:

Comments. String comments explaining usage or context. Key naming. Descriptive keys like dashboard.user.greeting vs string_47. Screenshots. UI screenshots showing where strings appear. Pluralization rules. ICU MessageFormat or similar for plural handling.

Git sync should preserve and transfer this context to translators, improving translation quality.

Security considerations

Git integration requires repository access. Security implications:

Minimal permissions. Connector should need only read/write on specific paths, not full repo access.

Token management. API tokens should be scoped and rotatable.

Audit logging. Track what the integration reads and writes.

Content handling. Where does string content go during translation? Understanding data flow matters for sensitive projects.

Review security posture before granting repo access to any integration.

Evaluating Git localization tools

Key evaluation criteria:

Sync reliability. Does it catch all changes? Are translations ever lost or misapplied?

Latency. How fast from commit to translated PR?

Branch handling. Does it actually work with your branching strategy?

Format support. Does it handle your specific file formats correctly?

Translation capabilities. Beyond sync, what translation tools are available—TM, AI, QA?

Pricing model. Per-string, per-user, per-project?

Pilot with a non-critical project before connecting main repositories.

The developer-translator bridge

Git-native localization serves both sides:

Developers get localization that fits their workflow—no context switching, no manual file management, no special tools to learn.

Translators get professional translation tools—TM, glossaries, context, QA—not code editors.

Organizations get faster localization, fewer errors, and clear status visibility.

The bridge connects two different workflows without forcing either side to adopt the other’s tools.

Language Ops provides GitHub and GitLab integration with automatic sync, branch-aware translation, and continuous localization workflow. Connect your repository to see Git-native localization.