On Friday 20 June 2008, Nicolas François wrote: > All language teams using the pseudo-urls are in copy. > Please reply to debian-i18n. > > I've prepared a new script for the generation of the coordination pages > (http://i18n.debian.net/debian-l10n/) > > It will handle errors in a better way, which should result in less > messages being missed by the robot and less messages being kept in the > BTS state (when bugs are closed in the BTS, but not noticed). The Dutch team does not actually use the "central" coordination pages, but rather uses ones hosted by Tim Dijkstra [1]. We do use basically the same mechanism though. However, that is the reason why basically all packages are in LCFC stage, while most of them should be done. Cause for that is that we send BTS messages directly to Tim (as they are basically empty of context and would only clutter up the mailing list), so the link with the BTS is never seen by the central pages and thus later status changes cannot be updated. I would not mind switching to the central pages (in fact, I'm in favor of making that switch, even though Tim's page is very usable), but that would mean some massive status sync will need to be done. Or that we start "from scratch". > Could you review the new pages and check if using the 2006-01-01 > threshold would be OK for all of you? > (I can use a different threshold for each mailing lists. > You may also prefer to use some DONE messages to close them.) Can BTS and Done messages also be sent directly for the central pages, i.e. not through the d-l10n-* lists? Does the central system have some way to mark entries as "invalid" (e.g. some translation listed as being "po-debconf" while it should be "po")? Cheers, FJP [1] http://dutch.debian.net/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.