[Dctrl-tools-devel] Splitting out upstream, perhaps?
david at tilapin.org
Tue Jun 19 21:02:13 UTC 2012
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Le 19/06/2012 16:15, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho a écrit :
> always hoped dctrl-tools had wider applicability (and I'm currently using it in
> my doctoral work for something totally unrelated to Debian).
Great to see your hopes became a reality!
> And a question: how do translation updates work in upstream development,
> generally? I've never had to deal with that so far.
Translations within Debian are usually limited to debconf templates,
while runtime and documentation translations are handled upstream
(upstream being Debian again for dctrl-tools).
If the current translation workflow is not a burden, I'd propose to keep
it that way: allowing translators to commit directly, and handling
(currently most of the) other translations with the BTS or via direct
mail. I can't speak for other teams, but as a French translator, I can
assure you I don't mind contributing upstream (quite the contrary), and
the team should continue its reviews in order to offer quality translations.
If you wish to propose another translation workflow, you may be
interested in the Translation Project . I also participate to some
upstream translations that way, both approaches may have pros and cons,
I'm willing to discuss them if you consider another approach.
On a technical point of view, I guess there will be some (translatable)
upstream part and some additional (translatable) Debian part. The
translations (PO files) could either be split, or simply kept in one
block (for example, packages.d.o master branch includes every strings,
including Debian specific ones, so translators only need to work on one
(set of) PO file(s), and those translations are available in all
flavors: Debian, Ubuntu, or archive.d.n).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Dctrl-tools-devel