Re: Please consider unblocking boxbackup_0.11~rc3~r2502-4
On 11/08/2010 06:22 PM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Reinhard Tartler (email@example.com):
>> I've spoken to upstream, and they are (of course) also rather
>> unhappy about it. Still, since boxackup did work in lenny and I
>> don't want these users to be left in the cold, I've uploaded a new
>> package with a minimal fix for #601506.
> Hmmm, including the few debconf changes that were fixed in the
> meantime would have been nice too (for instance, I remember about a
> full Swedish translation that's included in unstable but not in
> testing...that one would help Swedish to reach 100% completion in
> squeeze when it comes at debconf templates).
Well, that's really not fair. Translators could ask the Release Team
whether it is relevant to consider translating/updating a $package,
especially when testing and sid have different versions. Dropping us a
mail to ask is fairly easy and the answer should be quick enough. I've
even seen l10n NMUs for packages not present in testing. How's that
relevant for a release? Especially when you have very limited resources.
IMHO, translators' energy should be spent where needed *only*.
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي