Re: Proposal: move win32-loader in SVN repository

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 11:10:51PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 22 March 2008, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > I thought that the location was chosen so that translating it could be
> > > integrated, and I thought that was already the case. Yesterday I
> > > learned that this is not so.
> >
> > I expected that translation would be integrated eventually.  Christian
> > mentioned there are technical problems with that.  I'm willing to help on
> > those if I can, but we haven't got around to discussing it yet (it wasn't
> > a big priority for me either).
> 
> As win32-loader does not follow the usual structure of D-I components there 
> will always be exceptions. I see no reason to force our translation 
> infrastructure into supporting that when translations can easily be handled 
> outside D-I, just as is already done for some other packages that are 
> related to D-I, but not part of it in a strict sense (such as aptitude or 
> tasksel).

Ok, no big deal.

> > > I also personally feel that translation of win32-loader should not be
> > > integrated in the level 1 infrastructure _because_ it isn't a D-I
> > > component.
> >
> > You mean that because win32-loader doesn't produce udebs, it can't be
> > considered a D-I component, and therefore its translations can't be
> > integrated?
> 
> No,

Then why do you keep talking about udebs?

> you are twisting my argument.

You overestimate me.  I can barely understand your argument, let alone
twist it.

Anyway, no big deal for me as I said.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)