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

Re: [d-i] Testing po-debconf



On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 11:52:32AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Denis Barbier wrote:
> > > Do you really need to include the pot file in CVS? Can't it be generated
> > > from the templates file at build time or when a translator needs a pot?
> > 
> > Sure it can, but it is much easier for translators to rename foo.pot into
> > ll.po and work on that file; it could also in the future be retrieved from
> > a web page similar to the Free Translation Project, visit
> >     http://www2.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard/po/registry.cgi?team=fr
> > and click on some program names, a link to the POT file is available.
> 
> I'm not convinced. How does having the file in my cvs repository (which
> is a bit of a bear to access anonymously[1]) make it easier for a
> translator to get at the pot file, compared with apt-get source; cd source; 
> debconf2pot.

Only works for debian/_templates.

> Given the simplicity of generating a pot file with that
> command, there doesn't even seem to be much value in generating the pot
> file at package build time and including it in the tarball or diff.

I disagree:
  a.  Not all translators run Debian unstable[1][2][3]
  b.  Not all translators are well connected to Internet[4][5]
  c.  Not all translators are able to run these commands, whatever simple
      they look like[6]
  d.  It is not always as simple as running debconf2pot, see e.g. netcfg
      or alsa-driver

File size is not an issue, it is smaller than a PO file.

Let's compare
  * KDE
     http://i18n.kde.org/stats/gui/HEAD/fr/index.php
        translated/total: 32136/43346  74%
  * GNOME
     http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gtp/status/gnome-2.0-fifth-toe/fr.html
        translated/total: 13158/16648  79%
  * Mandrake
     http://www.linux-mandrake.com/l10n/fr.php3
        translated/total:  8154/8156   99%
  * Debian
     http://www.debian.org/intl/l10n/templates/fr
        translated/total:   623/3702   17%
        (these figures are not displayed on this page, but I can tell how
        to retrieve them if you are suspicious)

Maybe we should learn from other projects how to improve l10n?

There is one problem we can't solve, translators cannot commit their
changes to a CVS repository but have to submit dormant wishlist bugs.
But we can help translators by providing a translation framework
similar to what other projects do, i.e. have automatically generated
web pages giving accurate status report with links to POT files (for
new translations) and PO files (for existing ones).
And if templates.pot are not shipped in source packages, I am not
interested in having them generated by the translation center, it is
silly that we can have rules to make packages suitable for autobuilders
but not for translators.

Denis

[1]  po-debconf won't of course be available on their woody CDs
[2]  unpacking some source packages requires a recent dpkg-source
[3]  I know some translators do not run Debian on the machine on
     which they could help for l10n
[4]  downloading a 3MB tarball with a slow connection is no fun
[5]  please read the entire mail before replying that putting templates.pot
     in the source package increases download time
[6]  why do you think Grisu and I put links to templates files on
     our sites dedicated to templates translation?



Reply to: