IMHO you don't understand the proposal form Simon. (If I have understand it correctly:) A process on the ftp-master patch the deb with the translation, if the translation is not alread in the the package. This process don't change the package or the version number- It only add the translation parts in the ar file. On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 12:50:49PM +0200, Richard Atterer wrote: > On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 07:59:32AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: > > after a long night, I have a first draft of my proposal that defines > > signed packages and translations added to existing binary packages. > > > > <getting asbestos suit> > > I like it. :) However, you mostly describe the purely technical > aspects and not what changes would result in other areas. I think > there's a lot more to consider: > > - What happens if someone does an NMU - how do we prevent him from > uploading e.g. outdated translations? The easiest way might be a > rule "never update translations in NMUs". Or maybe check timestamps > of the .ar members? If somebody make a NMU, the server add the translation to the NMU package. > - How do bug reports get routed to the right place (program bug vs. > translation errors)? in future the ddts will get bts support. Now the bts on the ddts is only a notification system. (the server send a diff to the translator) > - How do we deal with out-of-date translations? Just delete them when > the maintainer uploads a changed version? One word to out-of-date translation: use gettext all the time and you don't have this problem. See my extension of this proposal. > - How do we avoid that a package is updated too often? Updating the > .deb for each translation change is far too often - maybe add any > new translations the moment the package moves from unstable to > testing? Obviously, people using unstable will then not benefit from > the translations. which uploads? There are no extra uploads. > - What would source packages look like for such a system? It /is/ > possible to continue to use the old .orig.tar.gz + diff.gz, but > automatic updates for new translations would invalidate the > maintainer's signature. Should we seize the opportunity to switch to > a more flexible source package format? Or just switch to > .orig.tar.gz + diff.gz + .i18n.tar.gz? The new source format is the old source format. The translated parts are in the normal diff.gz. Gruss Grisu -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debian.org PGP: finger grisu@db.debian.org -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux the steps: "What's Linux?", "Should we use Linux?", "How do we use Linux?", "Should we switch to a different flavor of Linux, or keep the one we're using now?"
Attachment:
pgp6Ddv1J1TYY.pgp
Description: PGP signature