On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 11:40:29AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > > This all make a very big delay. If we can, we should not use any > > package maintainer in this loop. We should use something like > > - sub packages > > - own PACKAGE-l10n-LANG packages with all translations (not only > > debconf, also all other forms: man, po, README's, info, ...) > > - use bigger l10n-LANG packages like the kde-l10n-* packages, see below > I'm not sure I agree with you here. I know you got burned with your > motivation to push i18n forward while some developers attack you in > public. Also, aj's mail about doing stuff without interfering with > other maintainers is still in my head, but we should make an effort. My point was more that having your goals depend on other maintainers doing stuff won't work well, and thus should be minimised. Doing away with it entirely isn't possible (cf things like FHS compliance or share/doc), and I doubt it'd be a win here. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
Description: PGP signature