-=| Christian Perrier, Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 07:32:23AM +0100 |=-
> Damyan wrote:
>
> > > The documentation[0] at debian installer site says that translations
> > > are to be send to the translation project. On the other hand, the
> > > page[1] at TP says that iso_3166 is assigned to someone outsite of TP
> > > and my attempt to send translations there were rejected.
> > >
> > > [0] http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/doc/i18n/ch01s05.html#id2708206
> > > [1] http://translationproject.org/domain/iso_3166.html (search for
> > > Bulgarian)
> > >
> > > So, which way is the "one true way" :) ?
>
> Both..:-)
>
> [snip]
>
> After discussion with TP admins, we settled on a middle choice:
> translations that were already handled in Debian would be marked as
> "external" in the TP and we would encourage *new* translations to come
> through the TP.
>
> That explains why [0] is now recommending to use the TP as this
> document is mostly focused on new languages support.
>
> Bulgarian translations are marked as external in the TP because you,
> Damyan, are handling them inside Debian (with commit access, as Tobias
> pointed).
>
> I hope that this better explains the situation which, I admit, is not
> simple..:-)
It does indeed. Thank you.
Although I am obviously fine with translating in Git, I wonder if
putting Bulgarian translation in TP wouldn't be better.
1) new translators will be able to help by following the docs
(also, translators coming back from the void (cough) won't be
looking stupid by following the docs :))
2) there won't be different channels of translation for iso_3166 and
other iso_*
I hope this doesn't create much work for you.
Not sure if I shall then send updates both to Git or only TP is enough
(or even if I'd have any use of the Git commit access at all).
--
dam
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature