Re: gettext packages
On Fri, 28 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I am a little confused by the gettext packages in potato and the
> archive. Both gettext and liblocale-gettext-perl are, according to
> their control files, in the base section, but neither live in base in
> the archive. Also, while gettext is optional, liblocale-perl-gettext
> is important.
>
> So do we have any sort of policy about these sorts of packages, and
> indeed about these two packages specifically? Should we make them
> both important, and encourage all packages which have shell or perl
> scripts to make use of gettext, to facilitate i18n?
Rgarding gettext, I think it should be of standard priority, and every
shell script using the gettext command should check for its existence
first (and use "echo" instead), so that we do not have dependencies on the
gettext package and people who do not like it may remove it.
> And as i18n support improves, will we move towards providing all of
> the translations within the one package, or will we have one
> English-only package, maybe several other one-language+English
> packages and one i18n package with lots of languages?
The GNU standard (which we follow implicitly) is to provide message
catalogs in the same package.
--
"ac603152e5b4ea2945d2dc7aa5511861" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: