On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 22:12 +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > Hello, > On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 10:11:21PM +0300, Esko Arajärvi wrote: > > On Tuesday 01 April 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > > > Is there a script that I've missed that tells me when a translation > > > really needs to be switched from default podebconf-report behaviour > > > (email Last Translator, wait) to 'podebconf-report --call' ? > > > > At least you can try --languageteam option, which can help if the last > > translator has specified some mailing list. Thanks, Esko. I'll give things 7-10 days more and then go down that route for those translations that missed the previous update. > Now that I'm actively translating > > debconf templates and see a call for an update on debian-l10n-finnish, Finnish is already up to date for emdebian-tools so that isn't a problem. (We have a number of developers in Finland and there is significant interest in embedded Debian there for fairly obvious reasons.) > I > > normally wait if the last translator updates the translation, and if he > > doesn't, I send my own update just before the deadline. > > It's very similar for the German team. I maintain a list of MIA > translators and try to ping previous translators if I see no > response/bug report on the list (although mainly for debconf ATM). > > Also please be aware that translators have a huge work load. I am very aware of workload issues - I have similar issues. ;-) > So they > may queue your request due to more urgent work[1] (I noticed that you are > updating your template rather frequently, this might cause some > translators to wait a little before working on your template). > [1] This is the case currently for de.po, please be a little bit more > patient As noted in my original email, I'm not asking anyone to rush the translation and de.po is one of the translations that was up to date before these changes so I've absolutely no problem with that one. Please continue with your normal process for de.po, Helge. My question only concerns translations for other languages where more than one update has already been missed. More to the point, my question concerns what happens *after* this round of translations are received when those languages still have missing strings and whether there was some standard way of filling those gaps. I only used emdebian-tools as an example. The emdebian-tools package has been under very rapid development - it's gone through 50 releases in 15 months. (Yes, that is about one every 10 days! I've been v.busy and I use the Emdebian repository so that the version in Debian has at least half a chance of getting into testing before I need to make the next upload to Debian. In that time, the package has gone from 30kb to 500kb.) It is not surprising, therefore, that the templates have changed. IMHO, changing the templates only four times in 50 releases qualifies as probably quite normal - it is only the timeframe that seems compressed due to the needs of the package and its users. I expect these debconf changes to persist now and for the general rate of development to continue until Lenny and then reduce significantly. After Lenny, I may look at translating the actual package itself but the codebase needs to be a lot more stable before that is worthwhile (with the possible exception of Finnish as Emdebian developers can ensure the translation is up to date internally once the strings are actually marked up for translation). -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part