Re: cdebconf 0.159
- To: debian-boot@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: cdebconf 0.159
- From: Regis Boudin <regis@boudin.name>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:31:16 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 1333488676.6354.29.camel@x200s.malip.net>
- In-reply-to: <1332601050.14662.23.camel@x200s.malip.net>
- References: <1331759873.2288.25.camel@x200s.malip.net> <20120317071656.GM13927@mykerinos.kheops.frmug.org> <d338707f7576bc979d7edd228cfbf1a5@imalip.net> <20120318180802.GY13927@mykerinos.kheops.frmug.org> <1332601050.14662.23.camel@x200s.malip.net>
Hi again,
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.
Regis
Reply to: