On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 12:28 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I am a bit confused. This is definitely a break in string freeze, and >> yet, the patch mentions that string freeze is not affected. Was a >> string freeze break approval asked for in this case ? > > I think the idea was that it only *added* strings and didn't *modify* > strings, so it shouldn't affect existing translations (we'd just have > a few more untranslated strings)? >
Even addition is a string freeze break and should be announced. Anyway, I just announced this on the l10n list, hopefully at least some of the translators will be able to catch up. > But you're right, we should have an explicit 'strings signoff' step in > the process. If nothing else, we should be justifying why we think > these strings "don't need to be translated". We should probably have > a 'last minute change' process written up as well, so that we always > have (say) a specific one-week window at the end of the process for > "nothing but translation changes" to allow translators a shot (at > least) at catching up with the 'last minute' string changes. > Agreed. > I hope in the 9.1 timeframe to be able to distribute updates to > translations like activity updates are distributed, which ought to > ease the pain somewhat. > --scott > Yeah - I'm looking at the way this is done ib Ubuntu, and I think this can work for us as well. Will we have support for installing extra RPMs via the customization key in 9.1 ? Thanks, Sayamindu > -- > ( http://cscott.net/ ) > -- Sayamindu Dasgupta [http://sayamindu.randomink.org/ramblings] _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar