[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debconf template translation

On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 11:01:05PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 04:29:26PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> [...]
> > (Pity we don't just have all debian/ directories in cvs, which would
> > provide most of this quite nicely.)
> Exactly.  Working on l10n in other large projects like GNOME and KDE
> is much easier because
>   a) translators have read access to an up-to-date CVS repository
>   b) l10n coordinators have CVS write access for their PO files and
>      thus do not depend on package maintainers
>   c) there is a string freeze (usually between 2 and 4 weeks) before
>      the real freeze, so that translators can finish their work.
	I agree. This is just what we need, everything else is a _very_
ugly hack. IMHO all packages (well, at least 'base') should be in
cvs.debian.org, this would help getting po, manpages and debconf
templates translated easier.
	I believe the more up-to-date translated packages (in all
three areas) are the same packages that are in a public CVS. Take a look at
the installer (debian-boot), dpkg and apt (I don't have data to backup this

	Also notice, the web site is the single thing we have more
up-to-date translations for since it's easy to update through CVS for the
translation teams. Each team has it's write area, can handle translations
their way and everything is integrated when the site is built.

	I'm not going to start bugging maintainers to add stuff to CVS,
I've already done it to no avail. But IMHO it should be a _must_ for
package maintainers to use a common (kept uptodate) repository translators
should work with. [1]



[1] BTW, I believe the debian-sourceforge plan (which did not get to
materialise) would be a great push in this direction (if every maintainer
used it, of course)

Attachment: pgpn89gJkHNhZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: