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

Re: Summary of Debconf i18n/l10n activities

On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 08:18:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> raw answers...
> > Who does decide which files are being imported?
> I would say the team who administers the server (what we defined as
> "Administrators" in the infrastructure targets). This is of course
> coordinated with the upstream itself, to determine what notification
> method they prefer.

I am still puzzled.  Imagine for instance that French translators of
OpenOffice are willing to use this infrastructure, whereas Dutch
are not interested.  Will this situation be allowed?

> An alternative method could be an "opt-in" system where upstreams are
> doing a volunteer action to "register" their project (here we come
> with ideas similar to the TP)

This is not enough.  For instance Debian maintainers may ask for debconf
translations (or manpages that they have written), but do not want to
include upstream PO files.

> > How are translations pushed upstream?
> Here comes the needed modularity of the system.
> We will probably need to design several modules to push translation to
> upstream maintainers (as you already explained in one of your mails,
> "upstream" can be a Debian maintainer when it comes at Debian packages
> related translations):
> -direct commit to upstream RCS (so various plugins for various RCS)
> -sending bug reports to upstream BTS (so various plugins for various
>  BTS systems)
> -e-mail (similar to the TP)
> -others?
> The push module will of course need to be able to send the
> translations in whatever format is needed by upstream (PO, XLIFF,
> Mozilla stuff, whatever...)

I do not understand how Debian developers will communicate with the
infrastructure.  Could we pick a random package and define the
different processes?


Reply to: