Hi Danilo, On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Danilo Šegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > У сре, 01. 10 2008. у 12:57 +0100, Matthew East пише: > >> I can't help as to when these templates will be available in Launchpad >> though. Based on what Ricardo said, it it doesn't seem like any >> templates have been processed by Launchpad since 4 August 2008. > > We've got a bunch of duplicate ubuntu-docs templates in the queue (all > with differing paths). It's very likely that the paths under which > Ubuntu packages provide POT files are different from what you use, so we > have no idea which ones are the 'real' ones. > > For example, in our database we've got an add-applications.pot with a > path of > > ubuntu/add-applications/po/add-applications.pot > > (or eg. server-guide prefixed with "generic/" instead of "ubuntu/") yet > import queue[1] uses: > > add-applications/po/add-applications.pot > > So, my guess is that source package has been changed in this way
From Hardy to Intrepid the paths of the pot (and po) files have been changed as follows: ubuntu/add-applications/po/add-applications.pot add-applications/po/add-applications.pot (i.e. the preliminary ubuntu/ and generic/ prefixes have been removed). However, this is *not* a change done during the release cycle, the very first package uploaded to Intrepid had this change, so there is no reason that I can see for Launchpad to have been confused by it. Moreover, we are talking about 4 August 2008 - two months ago! > assuming a split between kubuntu and ubuntu docs into separate source > packages or something similar), but nobody has manually updated the > paths. I've done that now for ubuntu-docs, but interestingly enough > kubuntu-docs is even more confusing (we've got both templates prefixed > with "kubuntu/" and "docs/" and without any prefixes, and when looking > at both, it probably confused us about ubuntu-docs as well). Surely the solution is just to look at the most recent upload? The structure of kubuntu-docs (both in the bzr branch and the source package) looks to me to follow the "docs/" prefix. But if there was confusion, it's the simplest thing in the world to ask for clarification when that arises. I wonder if there is any way that package uploaders or maintainers could be more involved in the pot template approval / review process? At the moment there seem to be serious communication issues... > I tried pinging you the other day on IRC, but then got busy with other > stuff. Anyway, if there's anyone who can help us resolve the situation > with *ubuntu-docs, I guess it's you, so feel free to get in touch and > we'll look into solving everything live. I'm currently without internet at home, so can't access irc. But I check my email and mail to this list regularly. -- Matthew East http://www.mdke.org gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF -- ubuntu-translators mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
