On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 05:07:04PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote: > On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:29:58 +0000 > Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:54:39PM +0100, Dominique Devriese wrote: > > > Andreas Metzler writes: > > > > Dominique Devriese <dominique.devriese@student.kuleuven.ac.be> > > > > wrote: [....] > > > >> Translating is pretty hard and frustrating due to it working on a > > > >> per-package basis, most importantly, and this results in a lot of > > > >> administrative work for the translator. They have to download > > > >> every individual package, find the template files, translate > > > >them,> file a bug report on it, and then pray that the maintainer > > > >doesn't> ignore it. Obviously, this is a pretty frustrating task. > > > > Last time I checked the statistics pages on the i18n (or l10n?) > > > > part of www.debian.org provided lists of translated and > > > > untranslated packages and direct links to the the respective > > > > po-files. > > > OK, the problem of filing bugs on every individual package, and > > > praying they get accepted, remains. > > Don't pray that they get accepted. Take the initiative and NMU in the > > usual way after some suitable period. Everyone else doing general work > > on our packages has to do exactly the same thing; what gives > > translators a different status? > For one: a lot of them are not DDs, so they can't NMU. Then they can't upload a *separate* package for the translations either. And suggesting that users should be comfortable downloading translations from an archive that doesn't have the same trust network as the rest of Debian is stupid: it's easy for an untrusted translator to negate the sense of a debconf question, so translations are just as important as everything else in a package. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpp0QhBvgb3G.pgp
Description: PGP signature