Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-13 Thread Eddy Petrișor
Christian Perrier wrote: >> My question is, can translators still choose to translate the big PO >> file with everything in it instead of the split sublevel files? > > Much much harder to implement. So, the answer is currently "no". Booo! :-D -- Regards, EddyP ==

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-12 Thread Christian Perrier
> My question is, can translators still choose to translate the big PO > file with everything in it instead of the split sublevel files? Much much harder to implement. So, the answer is currently "no". signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-12 Thread Ming Hua
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:39:22PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > I plan some changes to the D-I translation framework. > [...] > > My proposal is to split this out in 2 or more "sublevels" (the plan is > currently to use two levels): My question is, can translators still choose to translate

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-10 Thread F Wolff
On Di, 2007-04-10 at 14:38 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Jens Seidel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 01:31:29PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > > However, as long as it is very clear to everybody that this split is only > > > to set a _priority_ for what to translate first

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-10 Thread Christian Perrier
Quoting Jens Seidel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 01:31:29PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > However, as long as it is very clear to everybody that this split is only > > to set a _priority_ for what to translate first, the current split would > > be OK with me. It should _not_ be an

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-10 Thread Jens Seidel
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 01:31:29PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > However, as long as it is very clear to everybody that this split is only > to set a _priority_ for what to translate first, the current split would > be OK with me. It should _not_ be an excuse to stop translating once > level 1 is fi

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-10 Thread Christian Perrier
> Based on the comments above, I'd suggest to reorganize the level files as > in the attachments. Agreed and committed. > > Finally, I sincerely do hope that this framework will not increase the > number of automated commits in the archive. The SVN logs are already > hardly readable because

Re: Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-10 Thread Frans Pop
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 12:39, Christian Perrier wrote: > The lists of packages in the 2 sublevels are in the files named > packages_list_sublevel1 and packages_list_sublevel2 in packages/po in > the D-I SVN. Currently, level 2 has quite a few packages from which at least some strings _will_ be

Planned changes to D-I "level 1" translation framework

2007-04-10 Thread Christian Perrier
I plan some changes to the D-I translation framework. The sarge->etch release cycle showed that giving translators a good way to plan their work would be much appreciated. The current master file for all D-I packages has 1540 strings, which is huge. My proposal is to split this out in 2 or more