On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 08:42:42PM +0200, Christian Rose wrote: > > While Ryan should have informed the i18n teams that he had added a > > string, it's partially my fault for not informing him he had to do > > so (or simply doing it myself). > > Not only should translators have been informed; you should also have > requested advance approval for breaking the freeze (see > http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/tasks.html#ApprovingFreezeBreaks). > GNOME 2.10 is in string freeze, and will forever continue to be so. > Nothing has changed in that respect.
> > The priority of this string is very > > low (ie. you should never see it), it was added because in the > > current tree it would simply fail silently. We were also in a rush > > to get it backported and to try and get some testing before next > > week's release. > > What I don't understand is why this fix (the added error message) is > considered important enough to be in the same patch as the memory leak > and location name i18n fixes. > If this error message is not at all important, then why is it in the > same patch with a lot of crucial fixes? It appears that this situation > would have been more manageable if the fixes were seperated into several > patches that could have been prioritized differently. To me, it seems > like the only reason this added error message was backported at all was > because it happened to be in the same patch. It shouldn't have been backported. I should have noticed it when I approved the backport. However I didn't, basically because I suck. > > If this is unacceptable, then we will remove the string. However, I > > hope that you can see why we think this patch is in fact quite > > important, and that you have pity on us for only being mortal. > > I'm sorry, but I haven't been convinced that this added error message is > essential to have in the gnome-2-10 branch. I certainly understand and > share your opinion about the other fixes in the patch; the memory leak > fixes and the translated names fixes. Those do indeed fix important bugs > and can be classified as essential. Without wanting to tell the translators how to do their job. I don't see how having the string marked for translation is necessarily a bad thing. The string is not likely to ever be user visible, but if translators want they can translate it. Hence, the only thing it will affect is people's 100% ratings. Without being in on the culture, is this an issue? Please Advise, --d -- Davyd Madeley Systems Engineer, Bridgeway Consulting M: 0422 590 883 F: (08) 9490 1418 http://www.bridgewayconsulting.com.au/ _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
