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

Re: When to ask for a review?

(not sure if you're subscribed. Assuming you aren't: please tell if
you don't need|want to be CC'ed)

Quoting Martin Eberhard Schauer (Martin.E.Schauer@gmx.de):
>                        Hello,
> translating package descriptions has been my contribution for quite
> some time.

Thanks for that work. Apparently, from your recent activity, you seem
to be interested in doing even more. Great.

> Sometimes it is hard to understand what and how to translate:
> * The description is made for people with familiar with the subject the
>   package is supposed to be useful. The translator has to google a lot.
> * The English sounds strange to me. I have no problems reporting
> misspellings.
>   However i don't want to make things worse by suggesting something
>   indicating my funny accent to native speakers.

Here comes the list. It was revived 3 years ago by someone with a
funny accent, too..:-)

> What are good criteria for asking the list for help?

When you think that a package description could be improved in some
way. I can't see any specific criterion.

> How can I contribute?

Do the initial work:

- grab the package source
- modify the debian/control file according to what you think is right
- create a diff
- post an RFR message in the list (see archives) with the new file,
the diff and some comments if you think you need to explain your
changes. CC'ing <package>@packages.debian.org where <package> is the
source package may be a good idea as this gives the maintainer an
opportunity to comment
- gather comments and suggestions from other list members and,
dependending on your judgment, post an RFR2 or an LCFC message.
- finally send your proposals as a bug report (with patch) against the
source package and post a BTS mail.

You can get more details about the whole process as well as a set of
tools for doing this on wiki.debian.org. Look for "Smith" (I'm not
online right now so I can't give the exact URL).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: