Am 10/22/2011 05:37 PM, schrieb Ian Lynch:
On 22 October 2011 16:23, Kazunari Hirano<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Marcus and all,
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Marcus (OOo)<[email protected]>
wrote:
Wouldn't this also mean "tell us which MLs you need additionally and we
(the
PPMC) will create them."
No. We don't say "tell us" but they "tell us" what kind of language
list they need, and they propose it on this list.
If lazy consensus made, they will create a jira issue asking creation
of the proposed list.
If a PPMC member or a subscriber of this list don't like their
proposal, they object.
Finally, this will lead to the same ML structure like in the old OOo
project. And this is the point we want to avoid with a new ML handling,
right?
I don't know. What is the ML structure like in the old OOo project?
What do we want to avoid?
So, I'm OK with creating one new ML for other languages but we should be
careful with creating additional ones.
Yes, we should be very careful about it.
That's why they should take time to discuss about it in their language
before proposing an additional list.
Cultural issues can be sensitive and should be decided by the NL groups
themselves. The INGOTs is a much smaller project than OO yet we provide
support for Br-pt and Pt-pt - although more has been done with Br-pt simply
because we have a volunteer. We have even the possibility for US and UK
English in the general infrastructure and we will provide support for any
other language if requested.
In the old project we also treated the language differences seriously
and provided separate builds with 2 localizations for Catalan, Chinese,
English, Norwegian, Portuguese, Serbian.
We should repect a difference where a difference makes sense.
Marcus
