Hi, Am 1. März 2025 12:52:30 MEZ schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp: >Hello Holger, >thank you for the quick reply. > >Am 01.03.2025 10:28 schrieb Holger Wansing: >> Looking at [1] sr@latin seems to be common for such language, >> and since [2] does not show such error that you see for backintime, >> I think this would be the solution. >> >> [1] <https://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po/> >> [2] <https://i18n.debian.org/l10n-pkg-status/a/avahi.html> > >I am not convinced. Do we have an ISO or another standard for this we can >refer, too. >Another project (e.g. avahi) is not a good reference. I can show you some >other projects using "sr_Latn", too. Also Weblate does ofer this code. > >So I am confused. > >I would like to follow an official standard. >It could also be the case that gettext is wrong in this case. > >I also don't understand why Debian does this language check. Why does Debian >need to determin the language? >For example python-babel is able to determine the correct language name from >the code "sr_Latn".
My proposal is mostly based on the i18n.debian.org link, you gave. So, that's a debian-only topic in the first place. The error message you referred to, is only relevant for the creation of the i18n.debian.org page, and its translation statistics pages. For that, it is required to determine, to which language a po file belongs to. Apparently this logic does not know about the " sr_Latn" notation, but relies on "sr@latin", what seems to be something like a Debian-specific standard. I don't know, who decided to use this notation, and not another one, or why... You can ignore this error message, if you want IMHO. The only impact would be, that Serbian translators probably don't get aware of this file, and so maybe you get no translation (updates). Holger -- Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3
