>From a thread in -devel, dated September, after an ITP for Swedish
locale files for Mozilla stuff...
Quoting Alexander Sack (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> >I agree too. Actually, it makes more sense if we do a single package and
> >integrate there mechanisms to extract the needed files from xpis to
> >generate mozilla-locale-* packages instead of having each maintainer
> >devise its own (as well as redoing the registration of the packages in
> >mozilla as documented at )
> >Moreover, somebody (a packaging group) could just package the locale
> >definitions available for Mozilla , Firefox  and Thunderbird ,
> >update them from time to time and update them whenever a new release is
> >produced. That would avoid all the bugs related to XXXX-locale-YYY
> >packages not allowing transitions of new Mozilla|Firefox|Thunderbird
> >versions because they have not been updated and having the binary package
> >proceed into testing would break them.
> >I believe that's actually how Mozilla is integrated in other OS, for
> >example, in Solaris IIRC.
> I think, that this would not be too hard to implement. On the other
> hand, there would still be problems that some translations might not be
> ready if mozilla* packages become ready to go in. IMHO, doing so looks like
> a trick to declare translations not to be release critical and in fact
> inferior to normal packages.
Has there been any progress on that topic ?
The Arabeyes team (Arabic translators) want to get their ar
translations in Debian and they asked me for help.
Of course, I can post ITPs for mozilla-*-locale-ar packages and handle
such packages myself (by using another one as a model, that woulkdn't
be too hard), but it would be better integrating this in a more