Otto Urpelainen wrote: > I am also afraid that for rpms, current tooling makes success > impossible: nothing tracks when the main Summary is changed and flags > translations as outdated, and any volunteer translator would have to > endure a dist-git pull request workflow to contribute fixes. Yes, translators would need some translation tool that flags outdated translations and doesn't require pull requests to each and every package. For package maintainers who know some non-English language, it's much more convenient to write a translation in the spec file than to first update the package and then switch to some other tool to update the translation. The current RPM tooling works well for them. Years ago there were translations of RPM descriptions and summaries that originated from somewhere other than spec files. I don't know what tools were used to produce those, but they seemed to coexist peacefully with translations from spec files. They don't seem to exist anymore. The few translations I can find now all come from spec files. The disappearance of those external translations indicates that the Fedora Project no longer cares about translations of RPM descriptions and summaries, which is sad, but in that case there certainly shouldn't be a "SHOULD" in the Review Guidelines. Björn Persson
Attachment:
pgpnSuvWnhi7b.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
