On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 01:28:04PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 11:36:28AM +0100, Michael Bramer wrote: > > > _three_ years ago I start a debconf translation coordination web page > > and we translate debconf templates, bug the packages and put the bts > > numbers on the webpage. (The page start with 200 packages with debconf > > templates, and was growing with the time.) > > > Some packages use the send translations and close the bugs. Thanks again > > to all this package maintainers. > > In that time, I haven't seen any debconf translation reports filed in the > BTS on any packages I maintain/follow. Maybe some of the translated > templates came from the DDTP, and didn't say; but in general, I've been > disappointed with the lack of translations submitted for my own packages. only for the record: This web page was only a 'coordination page'. A translator could ot it, search a untranslated debconf template, translate it, send it to the BTS and send the bug number to my. After this I add the number of the bug on the page per hand. I add some hundred bug numbers to the page in two years and yes, most of the (German) debconf translations came from this page... > If these translations were collected into a debconf-de-l10n package, how > often would you upload this package? Every time a new translated > template was ready? Every week? I thing about every 14 days, to get the package into testing. And I will only include the templates, who don't have translations in the package itself. This should be a good compromise!? > > and > > http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-beyond-pkging.en.html#s-submit-many-bugs > > IMHO, that pertains to mass-filing of bugs that are identical, and which > can be checked for automatically using tools like lintian. Bug reports > containing translations are each different. It's the difference between > mass-filing of bug reports because programs are missing manpages, and > mass-filing of bug reports tagged 'patch' because someone has done the > work of writing all the manpages. > > I understand that response to the initial DDTP rollout was a negative > experience for you, but I also think that not filing bugs for debconf > templates is an overreaction that will hurt us. If I count it right, we have 5493 new translations from 452 binary packages in the DDTP db. IMHO it is not usefull to submit all this bug. A nice list with download links should be better. After an announce and some weeks we can bug the outstanding packages... > > I object too. debconf should never show a outdated text (languorous if > > this is a english or a translated text). But this is a debconf bug and > > not a bug of the translation. > > However, because this is a new feature (I don't think debconf has ever > been advertised to work this way), it is a wishlist bug. Hmm -- if > maintainers can't be trusted to fix minor bugs on their packages, how is > it better to make the entire system depend on getting a wishlist bug > fixed? :) :-) count it, one bug opposite to some hundred bugs. Gruss Grisu -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debsupport.de PGP: finger email@example.com -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux Original Kundenzitat: "Firewall will das Management nicht, es reicht, wenn wir am Wochenende den Netzwerstecker aus dem Server ziehen"
Description: PGP signature