[CC d-r@d.o] On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 12:09 +0100, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > Hi Julien, > > >> Since the last post on this bug report a load of updates related to > >> localisation have landed. Specifically the package was not previously setup to > >> support translations and as such was not translated. The package has now been > >> fixed to support translation and translations have been added for Danish, > >> Slovak, Portuguese, Russian, German, Polish, Czech, French, Italian, Japanese, > >> Swedish and Spanish. > >> > >> There was also a review of the english descriptions as part of the process > >> Which resulted in some minor rewordings and clarifications and (unfortunately) > >> a lot of reformatting. > >> > >> I have also taken the opertunity to revert the removal of fpc.*dpkg* as > >> requested in the unblock discussions for 2.6.0-6 > >> > >> I have attached debdiffs against the versions in testing and unstable, please > >> review and ack/nack this upload. > > > > NAK. While translation updates might be ok, new i18n isn't (and > > reformatting isn't either). > > I'm quite surprised by this refusal. Indeed, by formatting, we mean > English errors fixing on debconf templates. This does not effect the > debconf scripts or any other strings n the executables. I don't see the > point to refuse this kind of modifications as it should be 0 risk? > > Can you please explain more the reasons for your refusal? Hi Julien and d-r team, Can you please give me more arguments on the refusal of this patch? As I said above, these are debconf template text changes. It should be safe enough and do not risk any regression. I understood also that having templates translated is a release gooal. In addition, the fix the the postrm script was asked by release team itself, so I don't understant why do you close this bug with nack. Can you please give more hints so that I can re-upload a more suitable version? Cheers,
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part