[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Exploring the possibility of an l10n upload of w3c-linkchecker to fix pending po-debconf l10n bugs

	I have the strong impression that this is an automated email and
w3c-linkchecker has been caught in a drag net. I feel that there is
something untidy about non-maintainer uploads. So for this package I
would much prefer if I (or some other member of the Debian Perl Group)
could handle this.

	In w3c-linkchecker we have one i18n bug (655446) that is ready to go
and one bug (611653) that needs another look from the translator. The
bug mentioned in your email (614598) is nothig to do with i18n and so I
suspect your drag net script has a bug. The issue is not doing a release
as that is just a few minutes work. The issue I have is that it seems a
waste for so little gain - especially with the freeze still a way off.
If you could round up the translators I know it would get acted on
quickly, if not by me then by someone else in the Debian Perl Group.

	I have one last question: at this point in the cycle what is a good
number of translations to trigger a translation?

On 21/01/12 13:22, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Dear Debian maintainer,
> ("oh no, not him again"...)
> The w3c-linkchecker Debian package, which you are the maintainer of, has
> pending bug report(s) which include translation updates or fixes
> for po-debconf, namely bug number 614598 (and maybe other similar bugs).
> So, sorry for this, but the radar beeped at your package and here am I
> with what I usually call an "NMU intent"...:-). Please take this as a "very
> soft" NMU intent. Of course, there is no hurry or deadline...just
> "old" bugs we think are easy to get rid of.
> In case you can't update your package, I hereby propose, as part
> of a more general action of the Debian i18n Task Force to build and
> possibly upload a non-maintainer upload for w3c-linkchecker in order to fix
> this as well as all pending translations for the debconf templates.
> Of course, as you're probably pretty active on that package, an upload
> by you would also be OK...as long as it allows a round of translation
> updates.
> Such changes are always harmless, which explains why I safely consider
> building NMU's for such issues even though they're obviously non critical.
> The schedule for the NMU (in case it happens, that is if you agree with it
> or if I don't receive any answer in 4 days) is roughly the following:
>  Saturday, January 21, 2012   : send this notice
>  Wednesday, January 25, 2012       : post a NMU announcement to debian-i18n with you
>                  (maintainer) CC'ed
>  Thursday, February 02, 2012       : deadline for receiving translation updates
>  Friday, February 03, 2012       : build the package and upload it to DELAYED/7-day
>                  send the NMU patch to the BTS
>  Friday, February 10, 2012       : NMU reaches incoming
> If you intent to upload yourself, please discuss with me. I propose
> handling a translation update round and I can handle it myself for you.
> That will just require a few days. That could maybe save you from
> seeing me coming back again in a few months.
> In case I upload an NMU, I will subscribe to the Package Tracking System for
> w3c-linkchecker and follow its life for 60 days after my NMU in order to fix
> any issue potentially introduced by my upload.
> Let me know, as soon as possible, if you have any kind of objection to this
> process.
> If you'd rather do the fix yourself, I will of course leave the package
> alone. Same if you have reasons not to do the update now.
> _______________________________________________
> pkg-perl-maintainers mailing list
> pkg-perl-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-perl-maintainers

Nicholas Bamber | http://www.periapt.co.uk/
PGP key 3BFFE73C from pgp.mit.edu

Reply to: