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

Re: Better l10n for CDDs



On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 14:23:21 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille wrote:

> On Fri, 6 Jun 2008, David Paleino wrote:
> 
> > This is certainly impossible.
> 
> Impossible??? Hmmm, I stopped using this word. ;-)))

"Impossible is nothing" is ™, AFAIK ;)

> [..]
> > But, well, I'm not totally against static pages -- I'd regard
> > them as a bit "old-fashioned", but that's just me.
> 
> A "old-fashioned" or "conservative" as I would call it ;-) is what people
> like me seem to prefer ... so I better spend my time on the code I try to
> develop instead of debugging things I would finally like to drop.
> 
> May be that's not a really brave point of view but solving this kind of
> riddles is for the young brave ones and not for old men like me. ;-)

It seems like I'm belonging to "the young brave ones". ;)

I suggest to do something better: implement both approaches in the code -- and
every CDD team chooses what fits best them. Something like:

approach="static"

if approach=="static":
  # do Andreas' things here
else:
  # do brave and hazardous things here

;)

(and, yes, we could put "static" as the default choice)

Oh, well, but this discussion is pointless at the end. Just write some code,
and see what happens :)

If you ever feel like debugging what's going on there, you'd do me a great
favour ;)

Cheers,
David

-- 
 . ''`.  Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: