Re: RFD: translated description with dpkg
Hi,
[BTW, is this still relevant on debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org?]
>>"Steve" == Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org> writes:
Steve> My point, which people seem to keep ignoring, is that I
Steve> *personally* have no way of judging the quality of a
Steve> translation. Therefore, I cannot take responsibility for
Steve> including random translation submissions into my package.
Most people packaging complex pieces of software can not,
personally, take responsibility for that in the first place. You
hitnk the kernel image maintainers know and are responsible for every
nuance of every drivber packaged? Hell, I package make, and I have no
idea how the rules processor works. Even significant time spent into
device drivers is unlikely to allow me to correct them; The same is
true for the intricate internals of gnus.
We already package things that we ourselces can't completely
fix. or even know if they are totally screwed up or not. (I do not
use nnimap, and I can't tell whether it is screwed up wither -- how
long do you want to wait until I package a enw release?)
What We are indeed responsible for is that when informed of
the problem, we go and ask people in the know. We ask upstream, we go
to upstream mailing lists, we ask other developers, any one in the
community -- and we work together with the people who know and the
people who report problems to resolve the issue.
Translations are like that. W4e have upstream translators --
and, wonder of wonders, these upstream translators are likely to be
developers. We have infrastructure to help a developer correct the
translation when informed the translation is sub optimal.
>>
>> These are my packages. I am responsible. Mine! Mine! all
>> Mine! is a bad way to think of your relationship to your packages.
Steve> Maybe I communicate badly, but that is not at all what I said. Would
Steve> you include arbitrary MIPS assembly code patches into your
Steve> packages?
There is arbitrary assembly code in all kernels. I can see my
way to maintaining a kernel image package, yes.
Steve> And in fact, I have a better chance of correctly decoding arbitrary
Steve> assembly code than, say, Mandarin. Or Greek. I'm happy to accept and
Steve> consider patches to my packages. But if I just incorporated them with
Steve> checking, you, Manoj, would be first in line to criticize me. And you'd
Steve> be completely justified.
Rubbish. I know developers are not god. I expect you, when
told it is wrong, to find a mandarin speaking developer (and we
should make this easier) and request a correction.
Pretending we are really supermen who know all that is to be
known about our packages, and that we are ultimately responsible for
every aspect of out packages, and that we never, ever, need help
correcting parts of out package, smacks of pride.
manoj
--
Certainly there are things in life that money can't buy, But it's
very funny -- did you ever try buying them without money? Ogden Nash
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: