Re: debconf template translation
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 03:10:07PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> These bugs have a grave priority whereas they are wishlist bugreports
> when dealing with l10n.
In addition, these bugs are actually being filed (sometimes sooner,
sometimes later) and the buildd maintainers make it easy for people to
find information.
> I do not understand your analogy, there is no build failure when
> translations are missing.
The process by which build failures get handled is approximately:
- Someone (usually not the maintainer) notices that the package failed
to build.
- They check to make sure that the problem is not already known and
being worked on.
- If it's not already being dealt with then they let the maintainer
know about the problem, frequently including a fix.
Consider how translations could work:
- Someone (usually not the maintainer) notices that the package lacks
some translations.
- They check to make sure that this is not already known and being
worked on (even if outdated stuff was notified automatically you'd
need to make sure someone hadn't gone and independantly translated it
already).
- If it's not already being dealt with then they let the maintainer
know about the problem and provide the translations.
This isn't much different, especially from the maintainer point of view.
Life could perhaps be made even easier for maintainers by providing
automated tools to refresh translations from a web site. Nagging people
with something akin to the RC bug list might also help if people are
really not being responsive.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Reply to: