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

Re: Packaging very large i18n material

Hash: SHA1

El Lunes 9 de Junio de 2003 03:46, Ben Burton escribió:
> Hi.  I'd love some input here on the packaging of very large i18n
> components of software.  The specific case at hand is koffice, which
> still doesn't ship with i18n files.  I'd love to get this sorted out.


 we already discussed this sometime ago, and since then there are 
koffice-i18n-xx packages....

apt-cache show koffice-i18n-es
Package: koffice-i18n-es
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: x11
Installed-Size: 2104
Maintainer: Ralf Nolden <nolden@kde.org>
Source: koffice-i18n
Version: 1.2.1-0woody2
Provides: koffice-i18n
Suggests: koffice
Description: Spanish (es) i18n files for KOffice
 This package contains the Spanish i18n files for all KOffice

> The problem is that there is a *lot* of i18n material provided with
> koffice.  There are translations for 37 different languages, coming to a
> total 21.7Mb.
> The question is how to actually package it.  All of the available
> options have clear drawbacks.  The options as I see it are as follows.
> 1) Build a single koffice-i18n binary package.
> This is bad because each non-US user will be required to download all
> 21Mb of translations for 37 languages just to get their own language,
> quite a big ask for users with slower/limited net connections.

 No. I would not vote for that. That is crazy for the users.

> 2) Build 37 different koffice-i18n-lang binary packages (like kde-i18n).
> This is bad because we add another 37 binary packages to the archives.
> This is also not a solution that generalises since if we did this
> for every package in the archive that provides i18n files our package
> list would get completely out of hand.

 Yes, I think that not been good, that is the best solution. 

> 3) Include koffice i18n files in the individual kde-i18n-lang packages.
> This is bad because koffice and kde are on different release cycles.
> It's also bad because it means I have to ask Noel (the kde-i18n maintainer)
> to do this job.

 No, that spoils the translations from the translation teams due to the 
different release cycles between KDE and KDE.

> 4) Don't ship koffice i18n files at all.
> I don't need to explain why this is bad.  It's also the current
> situation, which I'd like to rectify.

 No. That is the worst solution. One throws away all the work of the 
translation teams and leaves the users without that work.

> And so I honestly don't see a good solution to this.  Can I please have
> some opinions on which of these solutions is least bad?

 Summing up, from best to worst: option 2, option 1, option 3, option 4 
(should not be even considered).

> Ben. :)
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: