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

Re: Remind/ask DDs to apply translation patches before release? (and ask for new translations at the same time)

On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 07:02:00AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > There are 1274 l10n bugs (412 of these over a year old, ~800 with a patch) and
> > 600 of the total follow the [INTL:xx] format so they are most probably
> > po-debconf translations which are waiting for inclusion.
> Please notice, Javier, that during the NMU campaign, I indeed fixed
> (or urged you to fix) a bunch of *your* own packages fur such
> things...:-)

I know, I know, but I'm trying to make ammends. I have not opposed the NMUs
themselves (I have opposed changing the debconf messages or removing them,
though), however.

> I'm not sure that we can do much now. The NMU campaign was an attempt,
> and a very successful one....but I did it mostly alone (Thijs and
> Tobias helped a little).

That's why I think it would be nice to bring this to the maintainers' table
(so to speak) to try to make them do their work. 

> Thomas Huriaux and I briefly discussed on IRC about this. Thomas will
> try to setup a robot on churro (i18n.debian.net) to generate a dynamic
> page similar to the Lucas Wall page we used for the NMU campaign. That
> page would sort package by scoring them for their pending l10n
> bugs. It would then allow us to decide that we take packages which
> reach a given level as a target for a l10n NMU. So, the NMU campaign
> would indeed become permanent instead of being a one-time effort.

That would be a great thing to do. Lucas' pages are really great. Although
I'm not sure the scoring is right, what is it based on? popularity or age?
I think it would be best to concentrate on popularity first than age (since
more users will benefit from the debconf notes). User-es, for example (as a
package that is specific to Spanish users and does not benefit for
translators) should have (IMHO) much less priority than gpm.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: