Re: Release Goal: I18n support for package descriptions in the Debian archive?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I'm cc:ing Anthony so he knows about my plans and I'm cc:ing
debian-release as a form of "first report status", as soon as
I got better info and improvements I can write a properly
report to the Release Team. :)
On 03-04-2008 05:46, Michael Bramer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 04:23:31PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> The main issues for this release goal were the automated
>> acceptance and distribution of description translations
>> on one hand and updating the package management frontends
>> to use the translated descriptions, right?
>> Can we get an overview of the missing bits and pieces by
>> means of bug reports usertagged goal-ddtp with user
>> firstname.lastname@example.org please, TIA?
> The big point is, that we don't have a working by-hand-upload. Felipe?
Not exactly. Just for the record 431891 is the bug
that contains all the info about the byhand-ddtp and the
progress towards AUTO-BYHAND for DDTP in the archive.
The SVN (debian-l10n) contains the scripts to generate
the packages and make the upload, although it is a simples
script just as a prototype, there are improvements planned to
automatize the task of update and upload a new translation.
> Without the possibility of uploading translations, we are not ready
> for a goal.
We are almost there. Yesterday I decided to give it a
new try with writing the byhand-ddtp script based on aj
suggestions, I will try to cover the name problems and only
extract files that we know for sure that are OK.
There are a few things not clear for me but I will try
to implement if in a way that it's easy to change:
* Should we reject the entire package if one thing is wrong?
Yes, I will reject the package if anything is not
formatted as we planned.
* Try to process everything in two cycles.
I will check everything and then extract if it pass.
Then we can move it to the proper place, fixing the
* Support for contrib translations.
Contrib must meet DFSG, but non-free not necessarily,
we would be allowed to distribute the non-free
descriptions but change it certainly need clear
recommendations and verification with maintainers. I
will try to catch up with this, maybe using a field
to identify translatable descriptions, similar to
non-free packages that marks themselves as "buildable".
I am not sure I completely understood why aj took that
approach, by I will try to follow his recommendations, I have
the idea to make it easier to get integrated and avoid extra
work for him (e.g., rewriting the whole thing).
I know aj was busy in the beginning of the year and
recently was busying working with dak, I'm not sure what else
I could do after having a new package and a working byhand-ddtp,
hopefully with a better approach/implementation we can have it
I'm sorry about the delay on this issue, I was unsure
about the next steps and the best way to implement a few items,
hopefully after this weekend things would move smoothly to the
As soon as get any news/improvements I will write again.
Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
"Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----