Hi, starting a separate thread for this topic. [ Frans Spiesschaert ] > > > I would be in favour of building a debian-edu-doc-xx binary with > > > the manuals for the current and the previous release and a > > > debian-edu-doc- legacy-xx binary with the manuals whose content is > > > no longer updated. Outdated documentation that is no longer > > > actively maintained, rapidly collects documentation-bitrot and > > > that creates a negative image for the whole project. With a legacy > > > binary this could be avoided, without dropping those manuals > > > entirely. And if someone ever would step in to update the content > > > of one of those manuals again, that manual could easily > > > reintegrate the debian-edu-doc binary. In the meantime I would > > > even be in favour of no longer actively present those manuals for > > > translation. [ Wolfgang Schweer ] > > Agreed, that sounds like something to be considered. [ Holger Levsen ] > YES, please! :) After looking at the latest progress regarding translations done on Weblate (thanks to Frans keeping those in sync) and checking the translation status of all translations, these binary packages could be built (contained manuals in brackets): debian-edu-doc-da (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-de (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-en (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-es (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-fr (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-it (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-ja (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-nb (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-nl (bullseye, buster) debian-edu-doc-pl (bullseye, buster) ¹) debian-edu-doc-ro (bullseye, buster) ¹) debian-edu-doc-sv (bullseye, buster) ¹) debian-edu-doc-zh-cn (bullseye, buster) ¹) ²) New packages containing legacy manuals: debian-edu-doc-legacy-en (audacity, itil, rosegarden) debian-edu-doc-legacy-fr (audacity, rosegarden) debian-edu-doc-legacy-ja (audacity) debian-edu-doc-legacy-nb (audacity, itil, rosegarden) debian-edu-doc-legacy-nl (audacity, itil, rosegarden) debian-edu-doc-legacy-pl (audacity) debian-edu-doc-legacy-pt-br (audacity) debian-edu-doc-legacy-pt-pt (audacity) debian-edu-doc-legacy-sv (audacity, rosegarden) debian-edu-doc-legacy-uk (audacity) debian-edu-doc-legacy-zh-cn (audacity) debian-edu-doc-legacy-zh-tw (audacity, rosegarden) ¹) new package ²) renamed from debian-edu-doc-zh zh-cn aka zh_Hans: Han Chinese simplified (China) zh-tw aka zh_Hant: Han Chinese traditional (Taiwan) pt-br aka pt_BR: Portuguese used in Brazil pt-pt aks pt_PT: Portuguese used in Portugal The package names are following a commonly used pattern, e.g. see the firefox-esr-l10n-* package names. As the package names are derived from the related PO file names (via Makefile.common), the related PO files need to be renamed (and some magic is needed for Weblate accordingly). Any objections to proceed like this? Other proposals? Wolfgang
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature