Re: cdebconf 0.159
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: cdebconf 0.159
- From: Regis Boudin <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:31:16 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20120317071656.GM13927@mykerinos.kheops.frmug.org> <email@example.com> <20120318180802.GY13927@mykerinos.kheops.frmug.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
First 2 races done, I've managed to get some sleep, so I'm back for a
week until I switch to China time...
> > Aren't texts identical to debconf ones? I was thinking so, so I never
> > paid attention to this very strongly.
> > At least they should be similar, so we should reuse debconf
> > translations so that translators do not start from scratch.
> Anyway, if some people could review what I did in cdebconf.config for
> the frontend selection, and tell me whether to go ahead with it, or if I
> should revert the the single static description, that would be great !
Has anyone had time to look into it ? It would be nice to get
confirmation whether I should revert to the original debconf templates,
or go ahead and make the "new" ones translatable.