Re: Last release on seahorse 0.8.x branch

2006-09-09 Thread Nate Nielsen
Abel Cheung wrote: > On 9/9/06, Nate Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The seahorse 0.8.x stable branch will mostly likely only have one more >> release: 0.8.4 >> >> So the HEAD seahorse branch (ie: 0.9.x) is likely to be the one >> translators would prefer to focus on from here on out. > > Do

Re: Last release on seahorse 0.8.x branch

2006-09-09 Thread Abel Cheung
On 9/9/06, Nate Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The seahorse 0.8.x stable branch will mostly likely only have one more > release: 0.8.4 > > So the HEAD seahorse branch (ie: 0.9.x) is likely to be the one > translators would prefer to focus on from here on out. Do you mean 0.8.4 will be out so

Re: Information to translators and question

2006-09-09 Thread Abel Cheung
On 9/9/06, Andreas Røsdal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Besides, many gnome translators get the pot/po file from > > l10n-status.gnome.org, which (AFAIK) simply invoke intltool-update > > to generate the pot/po files, thus your maneuver of pot file > > would be all gone. > > Who is responsible for

Re: Information to translators and question

2006-09-09 Thread Andreas Røsdal
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Abel Cheung wrote: > IMHO this is only an internim solution, not a permanent one, as > you would spend a lot of time syncing translation from ggz library > back and forth. I agree. > Besides, many gnome translators get the pot/po file from > l10n-status.gnome.org, which (AFAIK

Last release on seahorse 0.8.x branch

2006-09-09 Thread Nate Nielsen
The seahorse 0.8.x stable branch will mostly likely only have one more release: 0.8.4 So the HEAD seahorse branch (ie: 0.9.x) is likely to be the one translators would prefer to focus on from here on out. I hope that makes sense, and I'm not missing anything :) Cheers, Nate ___

Re: RFC: scim and gnome 2.18

2006-09-09 Thread Mark Leisher
Daniel Glassey wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to start discussion about proposing SCIM[1] to be included in > gnome 2.18 as the default IME so that languages/scripts that need more > than xkb layouts are supported by default. > > Also, scim doesn't have the xkb restriction where you can only have a > max

Re: [Scim-devel] RFC: scim and gnome 2.18

2006-09-09 Thread LiuCougar
Hi Daniel, So glad to hear that you are considering integrating SCIM into GNOME. That's excellent. On 9/8/06, Daniel Glassey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to start discussion about proposing SCIM[1] to be included in > gnome 2.18 as the default IME so that languages/scripts that need