On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 10:01:49AM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > > Yes we are since in the first place we asked nicely to change the layout > > > back to the original one (as it was before this translation) and then you > > (..) > > > > Maintainers or developers do not have a say on how translations are done > > except for gettext sintax errors. If you do not like how a translation team > > works, but you do not understand the language, tough luck. > > Do you think it is nice to start a discussion in english and see it forked > in another language? specially when a exchange of information could have > solved the issue at a much earlier stage? I won't discuss that. It probably was not nice switching to other language but Denis was, in my point of view, asking the rest of the team (which might not be fluent in english) > > The official maintainer is in _no_ way responsible for the _translated_ > > description of a package. Please, let translation teams do their work > > without interfeering. > > When DDTP will be integrate 100% in the system who will receive bugs on > descriptions? you or the dd? The translation team. Any other scheme is flawed and tends to problems (people doing the same work will collide, it has happened in the past with translations and will happen in the future if the maintainer, and not the translation teams ,is still the one merging changes) > Than please re-read my post. If believes that the french layout is better > why not appling it to all the descriptions? Because the layout is based on typographical conventions. That's what Denis said (more than once). What applied to french might not apply to english, or spanish, or chinese. > > First, thanks to Denis work, projects like DDTP are possible. Without his > > po-debconf half of the DDTP would be unmanagable. Please take time to know > > who you are you talking with. > > Still again I did so... but people were to busy taking up a flamewar... > read my other posts please before saying so. I read the thread you pointed. I also read your answer (the "you are not working on the DDP"). > That's why i was asking information to grisu in the beginning for which is > the proper procedure. Only a nice flamewar was born out of it. Grisu is _not_ the translation team coordinator for French. Denis is. Grisu manages the DDTP but that does not mean he gets a decision on how a translation should be made. > > > Why do you think we did ask kindly to have the french layout alligned with > > > all the others? and we did not changed it ourself? Because we did not want > > > to change the contents of the description even for a typo but having its > > > layout alligned with the others. > > > > > > > They don't have to! Content and layout in a translation is part of what the > > translator has to do. If there are typographical rules that make necessary > > a layout change a translator has to apply them! > > And is this a reason to start a flamewar because i was asking information? You also help it becomse so, by being stubborn and not accepting Denis point of view. > > Saying otherwise is like saying that I have to keep, in Spanish, the same > > sentences as constructed in English when, frequently, a sentence in Spanish > > is longer than in English and I can group information in the translation. > > Changing words and senteces does not necessary means changing layout. Could you please leave the layout-thingy? If an itemised list is not understood in say, Chowinese (just invented the language), you cannot push it through the throat of the translation team, however you are. It will _not_ be understood by the native language speakers, it will not sound proper or what else. > thanks > Fabio > Friendly, Javi
Attachment:
pgpkdGq86GxJG.pgp
Description: PGP signature