Quoting Helge Kreutzmann (debian@helgefjell.de): > Hello Christian et al., > the above two new debconf templates appeared recently on our (de) > overview page. > > Given that the Freeze is rather imminent, I wonder if the translation > teams simply should go ahead and translate them as there is probably > not enough time for SMITH. > > In my personal opinion in these cases it's better to have a good > translation of a sub optimal original file (if any, I haven't looked) > rather than a polished original and no translations. For postfixadmin, here's what I wrote and, sadly, sent to a wrong address a few days ago: ================================================== Please do NOT send translations for "debconf templates" of the postfixadmin package. This package does indeed NOT have debconf templates anymore. It appears on the l10n status pages because the orig.tar.gz file does indeed have a debian/po directory.....but the source package *with* the Debian patches doesn't anymore. That indeed confuses the script that gathers translations and postfixadmin is then reported as *not* translated. I do'nt really know what to do to fix this....except by gently poking the package maintainer(s) so that the offending debian/po directory is removed from the orig.tar.gz file. ================================================== For ruby-standalone, then yes maybe it shoul dbe translated immediately for the reasons you're giving. /me sad that maintainers introduce debconf templates so close to the freeze.... --
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature