> Yes, but it looks like I am being blamed for working on my own > templates without using one of the shiny tools you guys use. > Unacceptable. Well, if you want apologies, then please accept some. But I'm afraid there was no intent to *blame* you, just answer an initial concern by Josip and explain him why this call for updates was different from the other ones we're running for about 3 months now in the review project. > > > It is not documented but it is now implemented by default in po-debconf > > in unstable. One explanation could then be than you ran debconf-updatepo > > from a stable or testing system, which is perfectly fine. > > As far as I know, I did not run debconf-updatepo yet. The templates > are work in progress, this is an EXPERIMENTAL branch of a DEVELOPER > svn. I expect to be able to have my own small little corner in MY svn > repository where I can temporarily break things as I see fit without > getting blamed. Hmm, so far, to my knowledge, this work was triggerred by the review conducted by debian-l10n-english...and the review process includes that translation updates rounds. From the discussions we had in the BTS, I concluded that we mostly agreed on the final wording and this was no longer work in progress. Then I applied the usual process, with the minor difference that, having commit access, I preferred asking translators to avoid bug reports (which they respected so far) to avoid cluttering you up with these. If that interferes with your development, then please accept apologies again but, up to now, it seems to me that the one having the most work is rather me..:-)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature