Re: I18n of Packages files
Marcin Owsiany <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I suggest the following ($lang means two-letter language code):
I have discussed this with our l10n freaks in the local lug (don't
quote that). Some months ago I actually prommised to bring this
subject up in debian but I never got the time (a partially lost
interest i the translation part og i18n.
Their suggestion (they all rpm-users in some way) was to based package
localization om gettext. Im not sure I see the actual bennefits of it
when we're talking translating files and not just lines of output from
an ordinary program.
What does the dpkg-hackers think?
There is two other questions I want to raise:
1. What is the goal?
Should every package description be translated or is it enough that
the base system is translated and language dependend packages (like
(I think that RedHat only ``supports'' a language if the distribution
is fully translated into a language (installer and
2. What kind of infrastrucktur is the optimal?
Should translations be made on package time or could thay be included
in the distribution in some other way? If I had a working package and
not much time to spare a translation just would have to wait if I got
on through the BTS. I know translator who wouldn't like that and I
really would hate to see someone make their own MyDebian just because
debian developers isn't as fast including translations as they are
produced. (I've seen that with Mandrake).
But maybe Debian-translators are more patient?