Re: Translation of package rox-filer.
Hello Francesco, I understand what you say but it will be difficult to
find someone that actually uses rox-filer (because one must know its
idiosyncrasies) and that will go through all its options and check
properly the translation.
You see, why nobody (except me) bothered until now? Because rox
doesn't use regular terms nor do things in the way GNOME like
applications do, it's a long translation and not many people use it.
I don't use it currently, but I used it when I translated it and I did
it very thoroughly.
That's one of the reasons why I frequently update the translations I
make, because I use those apps and if I spot something that needs
improvement I fix it. Also if the original enunciate is dubious or
incorrect I frequently contact the authors so they fix it too.
So again, please include it because you won't find someone to properly
revise it.
P.S. thank you for your work. But you could have answered my emails
and this could have been promptly cleared.
S.
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Francesco P. Lovergine
<frankie@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 01:13:44PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>> (CC'ing to debian-i18n as that might be of interest for other
>> translators. Also CC'ing rox-filer maintainer, by courtesy as we're
>> talking about him|her)
>>
>> (and re-cc'ing him|her as I made a typo in the package name)
>>
>
> Sorry, but I generally prefer some sort of cross-validation
> with translation. Probably I'm an optimist. I still use rox-filer
> and update it from time to time, but upstream has not released
> a new version since a long period. I can upload a new translation any time now,
> if the translation is considered complete and good enough.
>
> --
> Francesco P. Lovergine
>
Reply to: