Dear Debian I18N people,
I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
debsecan.
debsecan already includes cs.po de.po fr.po it.po pt.po sv.po.
So do not translate it to these languages (the translators will be
contacted separately).
languagetranslated fuzzy
FYI,
regards,
Davide
PS: I'm working on the debian package which will be ready in the next few days
- Forwarded message from Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:21:15 +0100
To:
Dear Debian I18N people,
I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
wacom-tools.
wacom-tools already includes cs.po de.po fr.po gl.po it.po ja.po nl.po pt.po
sv.po vi.po.
So do not translate it to these languages (the translators will be
contacted separately).
langua
> It seems that I have to prepare a t-p-u version with only the
> important bits from the changelogs of from my initial mail anyway
> so if it's OK for the RMs I will add the template change alongside
> with all translations to that, too.
Hmmm, I'm not sure I get the exact plan.
My proposal, aft
Il giorno mar, 13/02/2007 alle 20.26 +0100, Robert Millan ha scritto:
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to announce that win32-loader's strings are now frozen in
> preparation for a new release.
>
> Currently, the following translations are incomplete and you might
> want to update them:
>
> cs: 23 translate
Hi
On 2007-02-18 Christian Perrier wrote:
> > The version in testing has an RC bug, #409750. But an uncoordinated
> > template change is enough of a reason for me to reject this update and
> > require a targetted fix via t-p-u. I know Christian will have this
> > covered no matter what, but the
> > This is discover2.
>
> discover2 (http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/discover2.html) is not in
> unstable, you are working on discover
Which is the version 2 of discover, which happened to be called
"discover2" in the past and is different from "discover1" which
happened to be "discover" in the
On Sunday 18 February 2007 12:53, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Which discover program is this? There is already a discover1 package
> with po-debconf translations. Is this a replacement?
discover1 is now completely obsoleted and the new discover (v2) has a
different focus from discover
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (18/02/2007):
> Quoting Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 10:45:36PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Dear Debian I18N people,
> > >
> > > I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
Quoting Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 10:45:36PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Dear Debian I18N people,
> >
> > I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
> > discover.
>
> Which discover program is this? There is a
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 10:45:36PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dear Debian I18N people,
>
> I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
> discover.
Which discover program is this? There is already a discover1 package with
po-debconf translations. Is this a replace
On Sun, 2007-02-18 at 11:12 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Yeah, I was considering this and I understand that very short delays
> may be a problem for these translators. In that specific case, the
> changes are *very* minor (Developer's Reference writing style
> compliance) and, for instance for
(2nd call for translations with extended deadline)
Dear Debian I18N people,
I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
icedove.
icedove already includes ar.po bg.po ca.po cs.po da.po de.po es.po eu.po fi.po
fr.po gl.po it.po ja.po ko.po ml.po nl.po pl.po pt.po pt_BR.
On Sunday 18 February 2007 11:12, Christian Perrier wrote:
> So what you propose is reverting the changes or maybe still ask the
> maintainers to do an update throught t-p-u?
As vorlon suggested t-p-u that is probably the best option.
After all, in the long run quality _is_ improved by the string
> The problem I have with this is the assumption that translators will
> always be available to do this on so short notice. That is just not
> realistic. You are virtually demanding that 11 people give priority to
> this rather minor issue, even though they may have other activities
> planned (
Dear Debian I18N people,
I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
mysql-dfsg-5.0.
mysql-dfsg-5.0 already includes ca.po cs.po da.po de.po es.po eu.po fr.po gl.po
it.po ja.po nl.po pt.po pt_BR.po ro.po ru.po sv.po tr.po.
So do not translate it to these languages (the
Dear Debian I18N people,
I would like to know if some of you would be interested in translating
portsentry.
portsentry already includes ca.po cs.po de.po es.po fr.po ja.po pt.po pt_BR.po
sv.po vi.po.
So do not translate it to these languages (the translators will be
contacted separately).
langu
On Sunday 18 February 2007 10:31, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Another possibility is also handling a call for translation updates
> lasting for 3 days (the templates changes are very minor and can
> easily be updated very quickly by translators) and then upload a new
> version of the package in unst
> This is a repeat call because the French translator noted some
> missing strings that have now been added to the POT file. The deadline
> has been extended as a result.
If some translators already began working on the former POT file, you
can merge your work with the new POT file sent by Neil w
> The version in testing has an RC bug, #409750. But an uncoordinated
> template change is enough of a reason for me to reject this update and
> require a targetted fix via t-p-u. I know Christian will have this covered
> no matter what, but the l10n update policy is intended for the benefit of
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
