[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Improving package descriptions (I)



Hi Martin,

Martin Eberhard Schauer wrote:
                      Hi,

some time ago I read a post of the DPL regarding enhancing package description quality. Bug reports from translators should be a means for achieving this goal.
(quoting from the developer's reference, section 8.4:)

Best current practice concerning l10n
  ...
As a translator, if you find an error in the original text, make sure to report it. Translators are often the most attentive readers of a given text, and if they
  don't report the errors they find, nobody will.

Sometimes when beginning a new translation for a package description
being part of Debian for quite some time I encounter descriptions which
I consider faulty/improvable. Does it make sense to report errors concerning
stable/oldstable when there are more recent descriptions?
This depends on the severity of each error and whether the more recent descriptions correct the error. I encourage you to report issues in descriptions as early as possible, but the vast majority of errors in package descriptions have a minor impact from a user POV. If they are fixed in the development version, there is very little point in reporting them against the stable version. Even if you report it, it's unlikely that it will be fixed. For example, fixes of typos are almost never fixed in stable, let alone oldstable.
Should one use specific tags for the bug reports? If yes, are there appropriate
ones (debian-i18n, debian-l10n, ...)?
I don't see any tag needed. If the problem applies to the English version, it's not just a i18n issue. Perhaps you mean translators could use a tag telling them the description has an issue and it would be more optimal for them to come back to it later. For that usage a usertag seems appropriate.


Reply to: