On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 11:43 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > I've found 3 bugs on a cursory look. It's quite a large translation, so > > that can happen, that's why we do have these review procedures. But can > > we please follow them? > > Certainly. That's the Dutch team call, by way of the translator. If you > prefer not having the complete translation included until it is > reviewed, it is your call. In such case, it could maybe be good to just > say "please note that we will take care of the update but need a longer > delay" when the call for translation is posted......that would probably > save me to send reminders and, maybe finally, convince me or the > maintainer that longer deadlines could be chosen. Thanks for your explanation. I still indeed do not share your quest for the 100% but that is a personal preference, you're free to pursue your own goals :) Including imperfect translations is better than none at all, so I suggest to include this Dutch one. I'm just concerned that an already included translation will easily be missed for review. I propose that when specific hurry is made, the translation is submitted like now, *and* a RFR is posted to the list in parallel. The improved translation can then be submitted to the BTS after the RFR/LCFC-procedure and updated in a later iteration. Thijs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part