[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [RFC] l10n survey available



On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 12:53:55AM +0200, Martin Quinson wrote:
> I've made a sort of survey about l10n in Debian. It lists all kind of
> material available (program, man page, web site, ...), and for each, look
> how the l10n issues are addressed.
> 
> Then, there is a chapter about the future of l10n, and of the Debian
> Translation Center (w.d.o/intl/l10n)
> 
> It is available there:
> 
> http://www.ens-lyon.fr/~mquinson/debian/l10n-survey

ok. 

one point to the section
!1.4) Package description
!
!Every package comes with a short description of its contents. For RPM packages,
!the translation of it is simply added to the spec file. For deb packages, this
!is not possible because dpkg does not handle it. There was a lot of discussion
!about this, but people seem reluctant to modify dpkg to give it this ability.
!So, some people begin to use a trick: Instead of translating each package
!description, they translate them in the Packages.gz file which contains them
!all, and which is loaded by apt. I personally think it's not the best solution,
!because it won't help when I do a dpkg -l, for example, because dpkg won't know
!about this translation. I think that dpkg must be modified. But as long as no
!patch gets written, it won't happen. Help is welcome ;)

the ddts-server make only the l10n job. The server (and I) don't make any i18n
efforts. The translated Packages files on gluck are only a hack to test and use
the translated descriptions. Now I have not a real solution to patch
apt/dpkg/... to use this translation in a perfect way. 

But IMHO the ddts resolve all the translation problems.  
 
> I'm very interressed in any kind of feedback. In particular, if the list of
> material is not as exhaustive as wanted, I'll be glad to extend it.

to the standard architecture:
  We should start and/or improve the translation of the texts from debian. (like
  descriptions, debian guides, man pages from debian (only) packages, ...)
  
  Don't start a project to translating all po-files. Some groups have
  his own translation projects (like kde). 

to the Organization issues:
  IMHO we don't need changes in the constitution.

  But we need real i10n groups, one per langauges. This groups can
  translated the (debian) man pages, write debconf bug reports,
  translated the package descriptions, etc. 

  But we don't need a 'a new kind of person'. 

  I love more the central approach like the ddts and not the
  translation per package (like debconf). The package maintainer does
  only delay the translation. 

to the Packaging issues:
  IMHO we should not include all translation in all Packages. A
  package with 
   - all man pages with all >20 translations
   - all package description 
   - with all po-files
   - with all translated README's 
   - with all info pages
   - with all guides
   ...
 are to big and useless. Nobody can write/read all this translation
 and use this...

 The 'orignal' package include only the english man and info pages,
 the english description, etc. And we have a usefull co-packages with
 only the translated parts (man, info, po-files, REAME, guides). 

 With this you need only reconfig apt and you get more languages or
 less. 

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debian.org
PGP: finger grisu@db.debian.org  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
FOR-YOU.txt.vbs
This is a .signature virus coming from the Philippines.
end

Attachment: pgp55rnk1d1a2.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: