Christopher Aillon napsal(a): > Martin Sourada wrote: >> Well, IMO it's not ONLY an implementation detail. Most of applications >> have >> locales in /usr/share/locale/*/LC_MESSAGES/app-name.mo. Why should >> firefox be >> different? > > Because the system doesn't work for it. The po system works great for > GNOME applications where the translators are heavily using Linux and > don't necessarily mind looking through source files to make changes. The > sources for any individual application don't change as much as the > sources for Firefox does. The .po file would be large and any change to > the source coupled with a language change would make it extremely hard > to track down precisely what needs an updated translation without > tracking down source changelogs and even then it would not be easy. The > majority of people writing Firefox translations run Windows and have no > technology background whatsoever. The .po system just does not work for > the project, so please don't try to force them to use it. > I do not try to force them to use it. I write it in next sentence: >> Either it doesn't work this way, or you have other reason to do it >> other way. >> If you put the *.mo files in LC_MESSAGES you will handle >> locales IMO >> properly, firefox will boot faster because the locales won't be >> handled by it as >> extensions BUT will it work this way? > > I can do this another way but that is not the solution. They don't > _have_ to be in extensions but it much easier to do so. The real > solution is to fix firefox to not be so slow here. Stop bringing up > browser bugs to the discussion. > OK, so should be bugzilla filled against it, or it has been done? >> then you agree with firefox developers > > I am a Firefox developer, so there is always at least one that I agree > with. > I'm sorry, I didn't know that, yet though I didn't wrote it, I was thinking about most of firerox developers. >> Well, I overdo it a bit with use of word proper, yet, firefox handle >> it as an >> extension and that make the extension list grow and to check for >> compatibility >> whenever you upgrade to new version. > > And some things are mistranslated and the browser hangs when I use > flash. These are just bugs. They are irrelevant to this discussion on > packaging langpacks. Please stop pretending they are. > Then what do you think is relevant? I don't see there other reasons than these. >> I don't mind if I have tens of directories >> under /usr/share/locale, but quite dislike that I have tens of >> extension in >> clean firefox install. > > Good to know. > >> OK, you say it is in xpi, because it is too big without >> compression, > > No, I said it is in .xpi because it is the format that works best for > the project. The fact that it is compressed is a bonus. I personally > don't care how big they are. I'm not the person who started the thread > because of things being "too big." > Ok, misunderstood you at first. Sorry for that. >> then, why not split it from the main package? > > Many reasons have been provided by me, and others. > >> IMO it is reasonable >> to either have firefox locales among other locales (i.e. in >> /usr/share/locale), >> or have firefox langpacks in separate packages > > So you are essentially saying that it is reasonable to install > translations in the main package and in separate packages. I already > picked the former. > Well, yes, but not blindly. It's OK when translations are inside the package, but as I looked into some of the *.xpi, I see these are not only translation for the first and they are handled as extensions for the second. In this (and other similar cases like OOo) I think it is better to have it separated from the main package. But that's only my opinion. If majority of people are against it, I am OK with the current state. > -- > Fedora-maintainers mailing list > Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers > Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
