>
> You're not very fair, here. There has been new tools aimed to track
> differences between upstream and downstream.
> You can check the "Changed" column in your language package list in
> Launchpad, which tells you how many strings have been modified from
> upstream.
> Then, in the package, you can filter all these strings ('Show:'
> drop-down menu, 'changed in Launchpad') and compare the upstream and
> changed strings. Then, you can either revert to upstream in two clicks
> (if you have necessary rights), or use the string improvement in your
> upstream file.The point is, I don't need to, and I don't want to. I don't have time to run around every distribution and check what they have changed. We already review, and re-review translations (via a two tier process). It's the distribution's problem if they change my (IMO) correct strings. In the end, I don't care if users don't use a distribution because of its bad translations. The problem is that sometimes ubuntu doesn't get the flak, it's the translators who do. I distribute tarballs of translations for everyone who asks. > > > > Sometimes, this mess makes ubuntu miss releasing translations. Glade-3 > > in ubuntu came without translations *at all* despite it being 100% > > translated to over 20 languages. > > AFAIK, that is a packaging problem, where there isn't any pot file in > the source. The process did it. Had there been no middle management of translations, they'd just be in the glade source tarball and they get'd released fine. Checkout debian packages for example. FYI, a bug has been fixed about this, but the translations are not released yet after over 2 months. So much for "up to date translations". > > > This is getting political, but I just hate this situation and I shake > > my head every time I see weird strings in ubuntu GNOME interfaces. > > We have very good relationship in French team between upstream and > Ubuntu translators, and all is going pretty well now. > Like in many other stuff, it's a more a matter of establishing > relationship than technical or political problems. > Peopleware! :-) Good for you, you have the people. it worked for you because you had the people. And they were willing to coordinate. It may work for large teams and language with lots of translators. But it doesn't for those who don't have the manpower. For that, centralisation of upstream is best. Languages with small teams are stretched enough, offering redundancy for them is dubious at best. I did my homework, I tried to contact the launchpad language coordinator, I got no reply. The launchpad coordinator appears to be inactive and I don't feel like challenging the leadership in the mailing lists. I don't even have the time for that. I tried to be active with the launchpad contributors by emailing them. No one of them is active for a long time, you talk to one person and some new newbie comes in and wreaks havoc. Now I don't want to do that anymore. Launchpad lowered the bar too low for anyone to click "help->translate" and wreak havoc on existing translations. This is a real problem with languages that don't yet have an agreed widely known standardised set of terms. Everyone thinks their term is the correct one and they should change everyone else's. The proper thing to do is to lock upstream translations. I'll give you that they should probably offer untranslated stuff after the release. But I don't want to run around this limitation and fix ubuntu's problem. > > Claude Cheers, Djihed > > > _______________________________________________ > gnome-i18n mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n > _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
