Hello, On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 08:57:48AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Helge Kreutzmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > Maybe a "Release-wish" in Lenny+1, which could be upgraded to a > > release goal in Lenny+2? (More seriously, probably a "man pages should > > use an automated means to manage their translations, preferably using > > po4a" or similar for policy) > > That's realistic only for Debian native packages. I don't think we can > enforce that on every upstream. And, anyway, it has always been my > feeling that upstream translation is not part of Debian l10n work.
Right, if upstream provides/maintains (!) man page translations, I see
no problem with that (note that my quick draft for the text carefully
avoids to fix a means). However, there are large upstream projects[1]
which have no idea about man pages lest their translation, and in
Debian every programm is supposed to have a man page.
Greetings
Helge
[1] E.g. GNOME
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
