Re: Things to check in release notes
Martin Bagge / brother wrote:
> in upgrading.po I found
> "All OpenERP 5 packages have been removed and are obsolete. This
> includes <systemitem role=\"package\">openerp-client</systemitem>,
> <systemitem role=\"package\">openerp-server</systemitem>,
> <systemitem role=\"package\">openerp-web</systemitem>."
>
> Add a "and" instead of the last comma as this is a list? Would reach
> some consistency at least. Or maybe change other parts to not have
> "and" in them.
Yes, that's the kind of thing that ought to be fixed in the
copy-editing sweep, which as usual nobody has thought to arrange for
before the text got sent off to the translators. Normally if this was
a regular d-l-e review I would try to ensure lists were consistently
either "X, Y and Z" or "X, Y, and Z" (either style would do), but for
the release-notes that may be too much to hope for.
As it happens I was just about to post the about.dbk file as a test
case - its contents seem stable and I only see one missing comma in
the whole file. See attachment.
One list-post per file is certainly the most convenient way of dealing
with them from my angle, but would people prefer it if I try to split
things up by "type" of fix, or are people expecting me to submit a
number of separate bugreports equal to the total Levenshtein distance?
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Index: about.dbk
===================================================================
--- about.dbk (revision 9809)
+++ about.dbk (working copy)
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@
<listitem>
<para>
Your <systemitem role="package">apt</systemitem> logs, available at
-<filename>/var/log/apt/term.log</filename> or
+<filename>/var/log/apt/term.log</filename>, or
your <command>aptitude</command> logs, available at
<filename>/var/log/aptitude</filename>.
</para>
Reply to: