[sr #110376] Creating an Emacs-Guix Git repository for Guix

Update of sr #110376 (project administration): Status:None => Need Info Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: What

[sr #110376] Creating an Emacs-Guix Git repository for Guix

Update of sr #110376 (project administration): Status: Need Info => Done Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #3: Done. _

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [PATCH] gnu: Add ungoogled-chromium.

On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 11:52:04PM -0500, bill-auger wrote: > FSF, then the FSDG loses its teeth, and we all look wishy-washy and > flakey on that, the main, central FSDG concern: which programs are > freely distributable and which are not I don't think the main FSDG concern is which programs are

[gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/08/2014 03:06 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > John Darrington skribis: > >> Well, does it work now? do we have translations of every package >> description in Womb? > > Translations are in the www repo. Actually, only French translations are complete; in Japanese, German and Russian

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/09/2014 02:57 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > "Ineiev via RT" skribis: > >> If there are other (non-web) translators, we may want to arrange a cron job >> to commit their translations to www. > > There would likely be duplicated work if there

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/09/2014 01:29 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > I mean, we already have a few package translations at > (representing the only > package file currently in POTFILES), but obviously the translators were > not aware of what was being done on

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/10/2014 03:12 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: >> >> (0) when a new (or corrected) translation is committed to www, www >> translators send updates to TP, and they merge it to their PO files; >> >> (1) when a new translation is submitted to TP, the translators send >> a copy to the res

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/10/2014 01:20 PM, John Darrington via RT wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:44:25AM -0500, Ineiev via RT wrote: > > Then, there are also s (which may "translate" into something > different, like or ) and a few other substitutions [1]. > I w

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/10/2014 01:17 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > It seems to me that the ideal would be to have (HTML) markup in the > authoritative source (pkgblurbs.txt). Then users could choose whether > to keep/convert/discard that markup. I believe it’s more flexible and > robust than trying to infer

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

On 01/11/2014 10:21 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > how about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? I'm afraid www.gnu.org translators would object; sometimes they want to adjust the markup.

[gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

> [karl - Sat Jan 11 18:34:38 2014]: > > > What would you prefer? > > I prefer plain text, but I don't feel that strongly about it, as such. > > > about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? > > If the "translation" you're referring to is the home-pkgblurbs.html file > which the w

[gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

> [l...@gnu.org - Fri Feb 14 06:03:29 2014]: > > "Ineiev via RT" skribis: > > > > So, are we to change the source format of blurb items to HTML? if yes, > > I'd file > > a patch to bug-womb. > > I became convinced that we (Guix) cou