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

On the usefulness of contributing to native packages

Control: tags -1 wontfix


Le 30/07/2012 15:40, Julian Andres Klode a écrit :
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 03:12:18PM -0400, David Prévot wrote:

>> The software-properties Debian package, which you are the maintainer of,
>> has pending bug reports which include translation updates or fixes
>> for translation handled by gettext, namely bug number 676288 (and
>> maybe other similar bugs, e.g. #621482, #624756 and #626941).
> Right, and it's a bit uncool here, as we are not really the upstream
> of the package, but rather Ubuntu is and I don't really want to
> keep a delta here. 

Given the following, maybe “uncool” is just some kind of understatement…

> And I can't just contribute them upstream, as that might need a
> contributor license agreement from the translator. And given that
> I want to get the Debian branch merged back into the Ubuntu one
> at some point, merging translations or any other kind of patch
> without a contributor agreement for Canonical is kind of a no-go
> for me.

It would have been a good idea to properly document the initial #621482
bug reported over a year ago with this statement, it could have avoided
some waste of time and frustration about update and new translations.
Tagging them as such right now including the software-center ones I
assume would “benefit” of the same care.

Could you please document inside your source package, e.g. in a
README.translators or README.contributors file, that patches and
translations are not welcome for those native package (maybe packaging
them as non native may avoid the assumption they actually are).



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: