On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 03:55:08PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > If upstreams are "sensitive", they choose a project name which, at > > the > > implementation level, is compatible with their target group. If the > > underlying file-system supports UTF-8, hardly anyone would care about > > data files that use multi-byte characters. But the user interface is > > what matters. > > > > We do have policies already about using American English in spec files > > as opposed to British English and other languages. Package > > descriptions > > must be in US English, too, and other languages are secondary only. > > This is Fedora-produced material. Our level of control on > Fedora-produced material is higher than on upstream-produced material. IMHO the Name tag in the spec file is also Fedora-produced material. Viewed as such, Fedora can and should mandate the format of the package name. If full Unicode encoding in package names is accepted then: A non-English speaking user will still be presented with thousands of package names in Latin (us-ascii) encoding which are critical to the system with obscure names (kernel, glibc, glibc, firefox, etc.) These names are not understandable or even readable by the vast majority of earth's population. How is the experience of the non-English speaking user getting better by allowing one or two package names in their native tongue (Chinese, French, German)? The most likely feeling would be that the distribution is minimally translated, or that the localization was started but later abandoned. If Fedora wishes to go down the road of full localization, then it should prepare itself for translation/transliteration of _all_ the package names in the distribution for each language. Anything else will just appear as a half baked approach to localization. Thanks, -- Sarantis -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
