Address issues regarding Brazilian Portuguese translation and refactoring of Jelly/Properties files keys for JNLPLauncher related views

[glasswalk3r]

No Jenkins issue associated.

This PR fixes:

1. issues regarding Brazilian Portuguese translation
2. A refactoring regarding Jelly/Properties file keys. The original text on the Jelly file was being put directly into the Jelly "variable", without using the indirection of have the "variable" content on a Properties file. While that doesn't cause any issues in the Jenkins views, it does make it difficult to translate the strings, since the complete text is defined as a key on the respective, which can become quite large and difficult to read.

Testing done

Both changes were changed by compiling Jenkins, generating a new WAR file and checking the results in a browser. No visual change was identified, that was verified both by setting the browser to English (US) and Brazilian Portuguese.

Proposed changelog entries

• Address issues regarding Brazilian Portuguese translation and refactoring of Jelly/Properties files keys for JNLPLauncher related views.

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

• The Jira issue, if it exists, is well-described.
• The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples).
  • Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during upgrade.
• There is automated testing or an explanation as to why this change has no tests.
• New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadocs, as appropriate.
• New deprecations are annotated with @Deprecated(since = "TODO") or @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.
• New or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
• For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
• For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.

Desired reviewers

@mention

Maintainer checklist

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

• There are at least two (2) approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
• Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
• Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
• Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically.
• If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
• If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, a Jira issue must exist, be a Bug or Improvement, and be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered (see query).

[oleg-nenashev]

LGTM 👍

[NotMyFault]

/label ready-for-merge

---

This PR is now ready for merge. We will merge it after ~24 hours if there is no negative feedback.
Please see the merge process documentation for more information about the merge process.
Thanks!