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

Re: Bug#686180: Please allow translation of all debconf templates



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi Rolf,

Thanks for your quick reply,

Le 29/08/2012 12:48, Rolf Leggewie a écrit :

> thank you for your ticket and offer to work on this.  That's very
> welcome.  The templates are something I haven't spent too much time on
> and I wouldn't be surprised about a fair amount of bitrot in that area.

Does this mean I should go ahead with the translation call, or do you
prefer we go through a full review of these templates on d-l10n-english
first (note that I don't believe a full review is necessary, see bellow).

> On 30.08.2012 00:00, David Prévot wrote:
>> Severity: serious
>> Tags: patch
>> Justification: Policy 3.9.1
> 
> I do not think this is RC-level.  The package does already po-debconf as
> 3.9.1 demands.  I have thus downgraded severity.

Actually, it says that “Packages which use the Debian Configuration
Management Specification must allow for translation of their
user-visible messages,” which is actually not fulfilled for this
particular screen. Since important bug fix via unstable are still
allowed by the current freeze policy, I must admit I don't really care
of the severity, as soon as we manage to fix it in time for Wheezy ;).

> Looking at the changes made to debian/isdnlog.templates over time, I see
> that your patch is direct reverse of the last substantial change made to
> that file, so it will need more looking into.
> 66f57040def47857f48544a0e2ed3627d5c8a4e9

http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/isdnutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=66f57040def47857f48544a0e2ed3627d5c8a4e9

I'm pretty sure this typo was actually introduced during the review of
these templates by the debian-l10n-english team on #550030, I'm simply
proposing to fix it.

Regards

David

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQPk0PAAoJELgqIXr9/gny0pYQAICU420TroT0+4LqXInMvPwP
KJzraDdAcNxi5VxU+tudcBsvpWJWgNlSdQ7hbjrOfqqyEC9ykTs0iWO2JelyQ4AZ
AFrCF3/C8wZg3g2Lx6XHhVtpgu4SCqgjzR52ujED/E0Gtn49G9homruNw3K1s8Yv
ceUouLYfpDkyufkubsEqHckIP9RPau2Mlgrmvr/738HPaCysaFi94tdByw1u8JuS
P9IPjjwYzEri7WcMr/TwcmahObkIByp/2zx9zsK4lDI8s7B6S0R1pIFqUVSnIEBl
c3qqnpQfr5xC5oZzBSnIh3WSonLOaXbtZOYpv3x/B+U4CbGZnieJScH+1XhE4VTe
ER9Le2zqXUp+Oi6jtqPzKa4UfqEuskhkSn8oDcmxyKyTexUqCR8/yhh7wcohDGmH
vzTNAyoSgLIAQI2Xv46HAahq6KPj1DcG30jqtTgQ3fJCTLt3WfH6Il76sYQcDkuf
0qM6ZHb5lyMBXb0WSH/rF5zzOiISnr2AXmg8oDpkhZiMPdnOvvI8dJ0cqNj0boJJ
/b3mqLAPem2pD4ATX5QSPhZ2L+1VbHh/xWqjtGQyQKExBkOMLa/xnBru2dNXHbL3
2HY0EwKTKhCXMeiWsMocAX4HWE6JEnEEH1lw8lC0YWk9Tb28UoCsDPp6ZgyrTrlV
ODDUAd/SIrbXNvCuKkUi
=rQ0S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: