> >Of course, as you explain later, for translators they are.s > > ?? Now I'm officially confused. Well, it's pretty hard to explain. From a technical point of view, there is absolutely no difference between the work you do on, say, iso-codes, console-data, xorg, menu..... All of them are debconf templates translations, or programs translations. The only thing that is special for them is that they are *prioritized* in your taks before other translations because they are considered related to the translation of the Debian Installer. Ie, as Frans explained, translating them is working on a full translation of the installation process because some of their material is used during the installation process. > >Remember > >the "levels". So, from the translation team point of view, files for > >iso-codes, console-data, xorg, samba, dpkg, etc. are "d-i files". > > > >Of course, technically speaking they aren't as you clearly point. > > <Clytie starts banging her head on the keyboard> > > Ouch. > > ********* > Just to clarify this pea soup a bit, do I use "D-I" in the subject > line of the "d-i" files which need to be submitted by email, or not? > ********* No. This will not help in any matter. > > I think I understand what you're saying, which is that all the files > listed on the D-I pages are "d-i" from the translation POV, but not > from the BTS and general Debian structure POV. Is that right? Absolutely. > So far, I'm only maintaining translations for program files belonging > to developers who have requested them on this list, which integrates > the translator into their release cycle, showing a level of > organization which in my experience does not leave updated > translations to languish in the BTS. > > My problems so far are squarely with debconf files. As I said, some > of my debconf translations have been submitted and unprocessed for > over a year. Since they are nearly all initial translations, that > means my community still doesn't have effective access to the Debconf > process for that program, despite my effort. That's pretty > frustrating for a translator. :( This is what we're trying to solve, yes.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature