On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 19:04:46 +0000 Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote: > > In most cases, a rejection from one sponsor is taken into account by > > another, providing that the rejection is clearly explained and the > > steps required to resolve the problems are reasonable. > > I feel you may be being a little too hard line here. The important > thing is to make sure that translation updates happen promptly so that > as many languages as possible are handled well. One way of doing this > is the way you're enforcing, to hold any updates that involve > translations until translations are done. Another way is to allow the > translations to lag a bit but ensure that when they are available they > are included promptly. That doesn't help the user. When the package is upgraded from the previous version or installed fresh, the user only gets the question in English. When the translation arrives, the debconf question has already been answered and the user gets no benefit. None. It gets even worse if the lag exceeds 10 days because then even users of testing get the insult of untranslated debconf questions. If the lag is less than 10 days, you might as well have waited until the translations arrive or use experimental. > Both these approaches have merits and what's > appropriate often depends on the package (often based on things like how > often there are upstream releases). The second approach is vastly inferior for the user. > > In other words, any package that does not deem it necessary to call for > > translations *before the first upload and before any upload where the > > template has changed since the last version* should not be using > > debconf in the first place. > > For the first upload I broadly agree but for other uploads I think it's > worth considering other aspects of the tempo of development - is the > effect of uploading without waiting for translations likely to be a long > term thing or is it likely to be a brief interlude in unstable. Any upload that changes the debconf template needs to be translated before the upload or the user gets no benefit from the translation. This isn't like program translations that can be updated later on, debconf only ever asks once. Or do you think that anyone without English as their first language should be condemned to run every installation through dpkg-reconfigure ? Who do we care about here? Translations exist primarily for the user, they do not exist to make things easy for maintainers or sponsors. These are not build tools for your convenience. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpdFvTtp326d.pgp
Description: PGP signature