Le samedi 02 février 2008 à 16:01 +0000, Kevin Kofler a écrit : > Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot <at> laposte.net> writes: > > I soo just wish specspo was buried and translations integrated in > > packages where they belong > > There's no way huge packages like openoffice.org, kdebase-workspace and the > like will get rebuilt each time someone translates the summary or description, > or adjusts the translation. That's a pretty bad argument, and pretty poor examples. Have not you not seen the OO.o rebuild frequency in rawhide? There's no particular reason for translations to have a higher churn than all the other stuff that wents in packages. Le samedi 02 février 2008 à 11:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen a écrit : > While I agree that translations are probably better off outside the > spec, Please note that in-package is not limited to in-spec. I agree that in-spec translations are a bad idea, but that does not make specspo a good system. Maybe it's time to fix the way translations are handled inside packages? Instead of adding a first overlay with specspo, and another one with packagekit (bandaid over bandaid) -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
