Quoting Aurelien Jarno (aurelien@aurel32.net): > This looks like a good way to me to support this language. However given > this is not a standard locale (based on ISO code), I think we should try > to get this upstream (GNU libc) first. This way if upstream wants to use > a different name, we won't have to do a transition later. This will also > helps sharing translation between distributions. > > Do you want me to forward this new locale upstream, or do you prefer to > do it? Merci Aurélien, for your answer. I'm fine if you do so (you probably better know how to deal with upstream than me....and you probably gained more legitimity with it). A few arguments may help: - locale modifiers are meant for this use..:-) - some KDE programs already use files named sr@ijekavian - there is already a ca@valencia locale for about the same reasons (not sure if it is upstream, though).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature