On 12/01/17 06:59, pravin.d.s@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 10 January 2017 at 14:39, Tom Hughes <tom@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I don't really understand the logic here...
I would expect anything in Fedora to be built with whatever
translations are provided in the upstream release - are you saying
that packagers are routinely removing such translations for some
reason? or just forgetting to package the extra translations?
Yes, forgetting to pull translation is one of the problem.
Also other problem is packages updating strings after translation is
completed. This also result in loss of translation.
Right, but both of those are primarily issues for upstream rather than
for Fedora packages.
Or are you proposing that packagers should be pulling translations
from some additional source above and beyond what upstream provides?
No, not this.
OK.
I'm not saying we should package a tool for analysing translation
status as I'm sure it will be useful to upstream developers but it's
not clear how you envisage it fitting into the Fedora development
process.
In Fedora development process, i think such a script/project will be
helpful like.
After Beta release, one can simply run this script on fully installed
translation machine and verify whether all latest translation from
upstream are available in Fedora or is there any specific string
breakage (i.e. New English words in package ).
Right, but as a Fedora packager if I have the latest upstream packaged
and this script says I am missing translations what will I be expected
to do about it?
You've already said you don't expect packagers to patch in the extra
strings so we can rule that out.
So presumably I'm just supposed to open a bug with upstream to tell them
and then hope they do a new release and that I can then get that in
before GA?
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (tom@xxxxxxxxxx)
http://compton.nu/
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
