Re: RFD: translated description with dpkg
Martin Quinson wrote:
> But I think you understand why we choosed the centralized way, even (or
> because) it takes the maintainer out of the loop. That's sad, but good
> translators don't have to be blocked by overhelmed maintainers.
Perhaps we need to consider good translations something that it is just
as right to NMU for as it is to NMU for good patches.
> I do translate some packages on a regular basis, and I have good contact
> with some maintainers, which reupload their package each time I change
> something in the french translation. For some other packages (and
> maintainer) it's a nightmare between to get coordinated between translators
> so that the work is not done twice just because the first version is rotting
> in the BTS. The worst case is when the submited bug get so old that the
> translation get outdated. In such case, we have to extract the old version,
> update it, and resubmit it. See for example #93444, which were updated in
> this mail,
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-french/2001/debian-l10n-french-200108/msg00175.html
> but nobody merged the review to the original version because it does not
> seem it will be integrated to the package.
That's absolutly nothing new, and not specific to translations, as anyone
who has dealt with sending patches to MIA maintainers knows. New
upstream versions regularly obsolete and break patches before a
maintainer gets to them.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: