Re: Would an ABI change of apt for DDTP support still be accepted?
On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 01:17:18PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-02 at 11:54 +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > Consider how many people whould profit from it!
>
> I'm missing the following practical note a bit in this discussion: are
> there actually a significant number of translations to take the
> non-trivial venture of a very late apt update?
>
> I value the importance of the DDTP project, but the translating effort
> has only recently seriously started. Looking at the statistics[1], I see
See http://ddtp.debian.net/ for this link [1].
> that the best language has yet only one third of descriptions translated
> in optional and extra, and steeply dropping to only a couple of
> percentpoints for those after that.
>
> Concluding, we will not be able to claim that Debian has "translated
> package descriptions", except for a very small number of languages. I
> think it's not worth the effort to risk delay or trouble for this; let's
> focus on other areas in etch now and make sure etch+1 has a really
> comprehensive set of translated descriptions.
Right. Nevertheless there are currently already at least 4 languages
with (partly many more than) 1000 package descriptions. Also consider
that the translation effort is independent of the Etch release (external
database, no package upload are required, except of course for apt).
Up to the release of Etch (for CD based installations) or even after it
(network connection) users could profit from it. I can also guarantee
that the effort will increase dramatically once we know that APT would
support it. Currently the matra is: "Let's ignore package descriptions
as these will probably not be usable in Etch at all".
Once users see a incomplete project they want to help, right!?
Jens
Reply to: