On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 23:19 +0200, Denis Barbier wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 09:48:00PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 22:03 +0200, Denis Barbier wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 07:01:03PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 18:08 +0200, Ruben Porras wrote: > > > > > > > > > There is a new translation available for the dpkg package. > > > > > > > > Please supply this as a manpage, not in Perl documentation format. > > > > > > Original document is in POD format, why should translated documentation > > > use a different format? Having the same format is very convenient for > > > translators. > > > > Given it's the only one for which that is true, it's probably incorrect > > -- and the English documentation needs to be converted into man format. > > I'd rather not rely on the behaviour of pod2man (personally). > > > > Both the French and Japanese translations are in man format. > > Oh no, I am now forced to tell that they were converted from another > format, and this thread will automatically degenerate ;) > > Pod2man works well on translated documents. > It generates *hideous* manpages though. Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part