On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 05:09:52PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> la, 01-03-2003 kello 10:33, Michael Bramer kirjoitti:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 02:26:00PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 08:04:22PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > >
> > > > Michael Bramer wrote:
> > > > > If nobody have objections, I will produce some debonf-l10n-LANG.deb packages
> > > > > with all debconf translations from the DDTP and a working debconf.conf
> > > > > example...
> > > >
> > > > I guess you're welcome to do this but it is fundamentally a hack.
> > >
> > > What happens when these packages get out of sync with the packages whose
> > > templates they contain?
> >
> > debconf should not show unsynced (outdated) descriptions...
>
> Suppose I have packages A (version 1.0) and B (version 1.0) and
> debconf-l10n-fi.deb (version 1.0) having the translations for those
> versions of A and B. I then upgrade A to a newer package, say, fetching
> it manually from testing, even though I normally use stable.
ok
> Now I have A version 2.0 on my system, but debconf-l10n-fi.deb only
> supports version 1.0 of A. Thus, debconf confusingly speaks English to
> me, instead of Finnish, and not only is this ugly, but I also don't
> understand English very well. This jeopardizes my ability to administer
> the machine.
debconf should only show the english one, if the english text is
changed in package version 2.0. Debconf should check the english
text, not the package version.
You get the point?
> To avoid this, we would have to abandon the idea of a
> debconf-l10n-LANG.deb for each language and instead have a foo-l10n.deb
> for each package. Thus, when I upgrade A 1.0 to A 2.0 I would also
> upgrade A-l10n to the corresponding version. However, this would mean
> that we have hundreds of extra packages, one per package that uses
> debconf. I don't think this is particularly nice.
IMHO a -l10n-LANG deb (or somthing like sub packages) of every package
is a nice idea. But our package management system don't support this.
> It is my opinion, therefore, that it would be better to co-operate with
> the package maintainers in the following manner (I'm repeating what
> others have said). When a maintainer changes his debconf templates, he
> notifies the translators *before* uploading his package (unless there is
> a great urgency, such a security situation). Since most changes to
> debconf templates will likely be small, updated translations should be
> doable quickly. Once they're done, the package maintainer adds them to
> his package and uploads. This avoids a flurry of new uploads due to lots
> of new translatons.
And I'm repeating what I said already:
I will code something and the DDTP will support this.
Now I thought about this:
The maintainer send a new debconf template per mail to the server.
The server get the it, put the english text in the db and give the
text a hight priority. The server send bugs to the translator, if
the old version is already translated and wait for translations.
Maybe some have comments?
Gruss
Grisu
--
Michael Bramer - a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger grisu@db.debian.org -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux
begin 755 LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs
This is a .signature virus coming from the Philippines.
end
Attachment:
pgpHlcLKWzbqS.pgp
Description: PGP signature