> …. In fact none of the translations > is updated because it is not maintainable.
Not true. I have kept the German translations up to date and besides a minor glitch in the UTF-8 version, they also worked. My point of view is that the most important bottle neck is to find a person willing to care about the translation. A technical solution, which lowers the barrier for contributions, would be a progress, but the barrier must be lowered considerably, maybe comparable to a wiki. See below. >> The Lazarus error messages are probably a different story. > > If the format is unimportant, why is that different please ? The lazarus error messages are a different case in so far, as there are many more commits per months than in FreePascal. Therefore, the work load is much larger and the ease of plays a role. With the few commits in FreePascal, I have to work on it only every few months and then it is more a question of motivation to start than the actual work, which takes 15 minutes to 1 hour. With Lazarus the work might become 1 hour to 4 hours. In business terms it is fixed costs (motivation, actual start and commit) versus variable costs (doing the translations). My point was that the current status for FreePascal is not too bad and and I support this by keeping the German version up to date, but I do not want to claim this to be the general truth, because it may not apply for the Lazarus error messages. If you can contribute technical work, which lowers the barrier, I would welcome it. At the same time it would need some non-technical activities to actually attract more translators. They do not fall from heaven like rain drops. How about using http://translationproject.org/domain/index.html Michael.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
