> (a) keeping translations up-to-date, This is why I'd prefer the status quo, currently we have a Japanese translation of James site and docs which is "unofficial" but linked from the James site.
What this means is that the Japanese is available but is not authoritative. If we publish Japanese on james.apache.org this would be seen as authoritative and MUST therefore to be up-to-date and accurate. We have no-one among the James commiters who writes a word of Japanese, and we couldn't necessarily rely upon Tetsuya being available to translate when we want him to. I'm very much in favour of having translations, but concerned about the resources required not to create them but to maintain them. d. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
