On 9 April 2010 00:16, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Jumping in that thread (you would have guessed I would, right? :-))
>
:-)
> There are even some locales that correspond to *no* ISO-639-3 code
> /usr/share/i18n/locales/ber_DZ: Berber (Algeria)
> /usr/share/i18n/locales/ber_MA: Berber (Morocco)
Dear maintainer of mercurial-server and Debian translators,
Some days ago, I sent a notice to the maintainer of the mercurial-server Debian
package, mentioning the status of at least one old po-debconf translation
update in the BTS.
I announced the intent to build and possibly upload a non-maint
Jumping in that thread (you would have guessed I would, right? :-))
> Mark Purcell wrote:
>
> > On Friday 09 April 2010 08:30:14 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> >> hm? eh? what? why would we remove a perfectly valid translation to a
> >> language spoken by 11 million people?
> >
> > Albert,
> >
> >
Dear maintainer of xsp and Debian translators,
Some days ago, I sent a notice to the maintainer of the xsp Debian
package, mentioning the status of at least one old po-debconf translation
update in the BTS.
I announced the intent to build and possibly upload a non-maintainer upload
for this pack
Dear maintainer of ppp and Debian translators,
Some days ago, I sent a notice to the maintainer of the ppp Debian
package, mentioning the status of at least one old po-debconf translation
update in the BTS.
The package maintainer and I agreed for a translation update round
(actually, we didn't f
Mark Purcell wrote:
> On Friday 09 April 2010 08:30:14 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> hm? eh? what? why would we remove a perfectly valid translation to a
>> language spoken by 11 million people?
>
> Albert,
>
> I don't think the issue is the removal of the translations, rather the
> fact that the
Mark Purcell writes:
> I don't think the issue is the removal of the translations, rather the
> fact that the locale-code hne isn't defined in ISO 639-1 & ISO 639-2.
> My reading of Chhattisgarhi_language[1] shows that the ISO 639-3 code is
> "hne", whilst the ISO 639-2 code for this family is "
On Friday 09 April 2010 08:30:14 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> hm? eh? what? why would we remove a perfectly valid translation to a
> language spoken by 11 million people?
Albert,
I don't think the issue is the removal of the translations, rather the fact
that the locale-code hne isn't defined in I
Dear Debian maintainer,
The diogenes Debian package, which you are the maintainer of, has
pending bug report(s) which include translation updates or fixes
for po-debconf, namely bug number 543313 (and maybe other similar bugs).
The i18n team is now hunting the very last bits of missing localizati
On Thursday 08 April 2010, Clytie Siddall wrote:
> - swith
> + switch
Fixed. Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-i18n-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201004082119.00545.elen...@planet.
Quoting Clytie Siddall (cly...@riverland.net.au):
> Should we have received an update reminder anyway? I haven't.
"Last-Translator: Phan Vinh Thinh \n"
"Language-Team: Vietnamese \n"
...and the Language-Team list does not accept non subscribers posts...
I send the file to you by private mail.
On 08/04/2010, at 3:18 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Yuri Kozlov (yu...@komyakino.ru):
>
>>> The deadline for receiving the updated translation is
>>> Sunday, April 11, 2010.
>>
>> Are you sure, \n is not need here?
>
> Sure, I noticed that too.
>
> Is someone volunteering to repor
Hi everyone :)
This is mostly directed to Frans, but also sent here so everyone knows it's
been reported.
The file boot-installer.po was updated yesterday (thankyou RSS), but there's a
typo:
> #. Tag: para
> #: boot-installer.xml:297
> #, no-c-format
> msgid "Alternatively, it is possible to l
On 08/04/2010, at 3:13 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Clytie Siddall (cly...@riverland.net.au):
>>
>> On 07/04/2010, at 1:41 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
>>
>>> If the maintainer doesn't send oneand if the few of us who track
>>> the state of debconf l10n completeness for their own
Hi,
I found another damaged data:
http://ddtp.debian.net/ddt.cgi?desc_id=42383
>--- 20100314/42383 2010-04-08 18:47:39.0 +0900
>+++ ddt.cgi?desc_id=42383 2010-04-08 18:46:47.0 +0900
>@@ -17,19 +17,19 @@
> final volume was released in 1885.
> .
> This package requires
15 matches
Mail list logo
