Re: Request to review templates of OpenStack-related packages
Matías Bellone wrote:
> All these comments are based on the updated files from August 16th:
>
> - received at debian-l10n-spanish@l.d.o:
> * nova [1]
> * keystone [2]
> * glance [3]
>
> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-spanish/2013/08/msg00006.html
> [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-spanish/2013/08/msg00005.html
> [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-spanish/2013/08/msg00004.html
Keystone and glance might need some mopping up of inconsistencies, but
Nova at least needs a full d-l-e review.
> - received at debian-i18n@l.d.o for:
> * ceilometer [4]
> * cinder [5]
> * heat [6]
> * horizon [7]
>
> [4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-i18n/2013/08/msg00017.html
> [5] https://lists.debian.org/debian-i18n/2013/08/msg00018.html
> [6] https://lists.debian.org/debian-i18n/2013/08/msg00020.html
> [7] https://lists.debian.org/debian-i18n/2013/08/msg00021.html
Those are the reviewed versions for ceilometer and heat, but the
out-of-date version for cinder (see bug #708658). I don't think d-l-e
has ever seen that horizon one - it isn't bad, but it hasn't been
reviewed.
>> Oh, yes, those strangely backwards "tenants", I remember that.
>>
>> We put the note in keystone since that's the package the tenants
>> "belong to", but I suppose you're right, other templates should have a
>> similar note.
>
> I know it was mostly a cosmetic change. It just so happens that we had
> a discussion about that term in the the debian-l10n-spanish list
> because different people translated it differently on other templates
> before I happened to check the keystone template where that comment
> was.
We had a lot of fun (translation: annoyance) with "tenants" in this
thread:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2013/06/msg00094.html
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: