-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gasper Zejn wrote:
> What about giving the translators those 10 days that packages need to
> be in
> the archive to propagate to testing? At the time of propagation to testing, a
What is the purpose of the delay? What is its purpose?
> syste
Dne nedelja 18 marec 2007 23:16 je Steve McIntyre napisal(a):
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> >On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 05:36:52PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> It's fairly heavily frowned upon; it might mean that different
> >> architectures get different translations (for example
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 05:36:52PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>
>> It's fairly heavily frowned upon; it might mean that different
>> architectures get different translations (for example), and we really
>> don't want that happening.
>
>That's a very go
Eddy Petrișor wrote:
> Jens Seidel wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 08:37:39AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
This just need the modified apt, synaptics that are waiting somewhere
into experimental IIRC.
Could we manage the po-debconf the in the same way?
>>> I don't see how
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jens Seidel wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 08:37:39AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
>>> This just need the modified apt, synaptics that are waiting somewhere
>>> into experimental IIRC.
>>>
>>> Could we manage the po-debconf the in the same way?
Quoting Steve McIntyre ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> It's fairly heavily frowned upon; it might mean that different
> architectures get different translations (for example), and we really
> don't want that happening.
Hmm, yes that's right. I never thought about the fact that builds are
desynchronised.
On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 05:36:52PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> >Once the new i18n server is up and running it should be as simple as
> >adding a new debhelper tool which downloads new translations at build
> >time. This requires no action of the mainta
Quoting Jens Seidel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Once the new i18n server is up and running it should be as simple as
> adding a new debhelper tool which downloads new translations at build
> time. This requires no action of the maintainer except the initial
> modifications.
This is more or less what I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>
>Once the new i18n server is up and running it should be as simple as
>adding a new debhelper tool which downloads new translations at build
>time. This requires no action of the maintainer except the initial
>modifications.
>
>Or does the policy forbid s
On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 08:37:39AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > This just need the modified apt, synaptics that are waiting somewhere
> > into experimental IIRC.
> >
> > Could we manage the po-debconf the in the same way?
>
> I don't see how, with the current tools and package organisati
> This just need the modified apt, synaptics that are waiting somewhere
> into experimental IIRC.
>
> Could we manage the po-debconf the in the same way?
I don't see how, with the current tools and package organisation.
The translations have to be included in the templates file, as
DEBIAN/tem
Il giorno lun, 12/03/2007 alle 10.37 +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino
Peña ha scritto:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 03:14:37PM +0100, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > Why not automate it? Whenever a new package is build (maybe only on the
> > autobilders?) a debhelper tool could request all translations from th
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From a user point of view, but that may be less relevant, bazaar is
> much less easy to integrate and understand than non distributed CVS
> live Subversion.
In what way?
I've not heard of CVS live Subversion, but once you understand the
basic idea of
Quoting Dwayne Bailey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Just out of curiosity, did you at all think of Bazaar? Why I ask is
> that that seems like it would make an easier integration. Plus since
From a user point of view, but that may be less relevant, bazaar is
much less easy to integrate and understand
First some admin. Can I ask two simple things:
1) That a key goal be integration of the work within Pootle. That
didn't happen last year and to be honest it could have if that had been
part of the goal
2) It relates to the last. As the Pootle team it was amazing having
someone help on the code
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 09:31:29AM +0100, Gasper Zejn wrote:
> Dne nedelja 11 marec 2007 12:25 je Javier SOLA napisal(a):
> > - The first one would be performance. Assuming that SVN is local, all
> > operations on files (updates, etc) would require checking files in and
> > out of SVN. I have no ex
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 03:14:37PM +0100, Jens Seidel wrote:
> Why not automate it? Whenever a new package is build (maybe only on the
> autobilders?) a debhelper tool could request all translations from the
> i18n server and update existing ones. This makes at least for native
> Debian strings (de
Dne nedelja 11 marec 2007 12:25 je Javier SOLA napisal(a):
> Hi Gasper,
>
> Implementing translation workflow in Pootle is one of our priorities at
> WordForge. The conclusions that we reached at the Debconf 6 meeting were
> that we had to make a very flexible system that would allow the
> configur
Hi Gasper,
Implementing translation workflow in Pootle is one of our priorities at
WordForge. The conclusions that we reached at the Debconf 6 meeting were
that we had to make a very flexible system that would allow the
configuration of many different flows favored by different Debian teams.
Hello.
I was thinking about applying to Summer of Code last year involving Debian
translation and localisation infrastructure. I changed my mind at last.
Last year I was still looking at Pootle, which was Debian's choice for
translation server. I was thinking how to best improve Debian's
infr
> Also, there will be people who prefer to work offline with other l10n
> tools and they should be given the ability to either upload the files
> with Pootle interface or commit them to the intermediary repository
> server Christian mentioned.
While this seems doable for Pootle, I doubt that the
Jens Seidel wrote:
It would be preferred if an updated translation is handled without
action from the maintainer. First of all a few do not like dealing with
translations, other forgot it, it fills the BTS with not very important
entries, ...
I agree, we should make it as automated as possible
Quoting Jens Seidel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Why not automate it? Whenever a new package is build (maybe only on the
> autobilders?) a debhelper tool could request all translations from the
> i18n server and update existing ones. This makes at least for native
> Debian strings (debconf templates) se
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 05:38:29PM +0400, Aiet Kolkhi wrote:
> I guess we would need a system that would stay synced with repositories and
> the language administrator would have the ability to "commit" the final
> translation of a package, in which case the translation would be
> automatically rep
Hello Christian,
If we propose something, we should probably propose something more
closely realted to Debian. I would say that work around the DDTP
integration in the *existing* Pootle server could be a way to go.
I think this is a very good idea and would drastically boost the l10n speed
a
Shall we propose an i18n project again?
Some areas in i18n stuff could certainly benefit from an i18n
project.
Last year's project from Gintautas Miliauskas achieved some work for
Pootle, but some drawback has been that it apparently slightly
diverged from the expectations of the Wordforge proje
26 matches
Mail list logo
