On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 10:41:53AM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote: > On 01-09-04 Nick Phillips wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 09:06:04PM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote: > > I don't expect most maintainers to be able or inclined to keep track of > > a shedload of different translations, and those who are that keen should > > May I ask if you are aware about the ongoing translation of the debconf > templates via the bts? If yes, would you mind explaining what's the > difference between keeping track of thsoe translation/bugreports and > keeping track of the package translation via a simple ddts mail?
Yes. Ideally, the maintainer should not have to be involved in those translations either... If you look at it logically, *everything* that has to do with translations is quite distinct from the other tasks relating to package maintenance. The translation of any part of a package, be it the text of error messages, the text in control, or the text in debconf templates, does not need to be part of the package, and hence certainly shouldn't have to be. The translations can easily be completely abstracted from the package itself, and that relieves the maintainer from having to have anything to do with them. It would also be very simple to have another subdirectory in the debian area of the source into which any translations over which the maintainer did wish to keep control could be placed (this would also be useful for sending packages independently of any archive/CD set). The fact that some maintainers want control of some of the translations in their package should not force translators to rely on maintainers, and should not force upon all maintainers the task of managing translations. Translations do not "belong" in the package. It should be possible to include translations in a package, but I don't see that this is a sensible way to do it by default, all the time. Cheers, Nick [hoping I've not missed something that means I'm making a prize tit of myself] -- Nick Phillips -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] You will soon forget this.
