On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 05:38:40PM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> I agree. But I don't think, a translated description is for dpkg
> importent. More importent is IMHO to translating the Packages[.gz]
> files on the mirrors.
>
> Think about that a minute:
(...)
>
> I see a lot of pros:
(...)
> - all tools has the translated descriptions (apt, dselect,
> gnome-apt, ...), because the /var/cache/apt/pkgcache.bin
> and the /var/lib/dpkg/available files are translatet
Not all tools might support Unicode characters so this might not be
true. There is a need to be able to switch to English when there are
problems (terminals not able to display characters come to mind)
> - nice little packages without 130 translations of the descrition
> - no work for the package maintainer. Normally the package
> maintainer don't know more as 2-4 languages and he can't work
> with bugreports about the wrong translation.
Bugreports are no problem, they can be re-send to the person
responsible, even-more we can have a Translator-LANG tag in control fields.
>
> I see one big con:
> - On a system is only one descrition. The system admin can't
> switch the language without download new package files...
>
> comment on it?
>
Con (big):
- no way you can do a dpkg --info xxx.deb and find out the
information on spanish, or make the WWW pages aware (w/o coding) of the
translated info.
I thought on this approach at first but I do not find it more than
an easy hack .... IMHO of course
Regards
Javi
