Quoting Michael Schultheiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > tags 336794 upstream > severity 336794 wishlist > tags 336811 upstream > severity 336811 wishlist > kthxbye > > Christian Perrier wrote: > > Please forward this to the upstream author along with this explanation. > > Daniel Nylander wrote: > > Please forward this to the upstream author along with this explanation. > > I've notified gallery upstream and their response is available at > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=8863025&forum_id=5400
"Ask for a reference to the documents which describe why this is a discouraged practice. If there really is a cross-platform standard for this we should consider adhering to it." Just look at /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES and /usr/share/locale/fr_FR/LC_MESSAGES on any Unix system.... This is mostly a matter of intelligence rather than standards. There is absolutely no reason to have different translations for French/France, French/Canada, French/Belgium, etc. This is true for barely all languages with a few exceptions, which I listed in my original bug report. For sure, the gettext system intelligently falls back in many cases...but as a general consistency matter, it's way better to have all translation files named only with the ISO-639 code. Again, this is common practice, not a matter of standards. One can for instance take all GNU programs as reference. All of them use fr.po files and .mo files in fr/LC_MESSAGES... Again, the only exception I know are widely accepted are pt_BR, zh_TW and zh_CN. And, sorry to disagree with your upstream, but I still consider this a bug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
