Quoting Dominic Hargreaves (email@example.com): > So send me patches. > > Do you *really* expect development in *unstable* to be stalled every > time a new template is needed? Certainly not. But I somewhat expect maintainers to try talking with -i18n folks when introducing translatable material, Dominic. To be honest, I hesitated before writing that blog entry because the maintainer of the "offending" package is you, and I already had good exchanges in the past. So, if you feel this was like fingerpointing, please accept my public apologies. Now to the topic and efforts to solve that "issue": I just sent an intent to help coordinating an l10n update round for your package (I use the same process than l10n NMU except that I perfectly know there won't be any NMU). So, I propose that we move on and go for it. Back to the initial topic of your mail: I still have to cook up something for the DevRef which would put some strong suggestion to first ask for l10n (and review of English as well) when introducing debconf templates. I however fully understand that it can't always happen (for instance when a debconf template is urgently needed for an RC bug). In such cases, I think that a small note to -i18n by the maintainer, basically saying "folks, I just introduce a debconf template without asking for translations because <foo> and <bar>....but please note that I will do another upload with the bunch of translations you'll soon send me".....would be just perfect to avoid grumpyness by frustrated translators.... This is certainly partly about frustration (after *months* trying to complete the translation ratio for many languages) and, again, I'm sorry this went on you. I really hope we'll be able to continue on good collaboration and I add +1 on my beer count with /you.
Description: Digital signature