At Thu, 17 Feb 2005 14:30:23 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > While I'm at it, something VERY important that slept out in this > > > discussionï: the list of supported languages for sarge is > > > *closed*. For size constraints, and for being sure that we don't > > > induce problems with initrd size for D-I RC2 and now RC3, Joey Hess > > > has requested that we stop adding languages to sarge-targeted D-I. > > > > It would still be nice to have the Esperanto locale in sarge, if that > > can be arranged. > > Sure. > > gotom and locales/glibc maintainers, any status about this old bugï? > > Is it delayed post-sarge, ignored (if so, it should be tagged > "wontfix", imho) or possible to be included in sarge? > > There's a chance that a translation begins for Esperanto in Debian > Installer and we at least to have some visibility about the locale > name. > > I personnally tend to favour eo_XX. Edmind has suggested eo_AQ > (Antarctica), based on the special status of this territory as part of > mankind's patrimonium. Others (in -esperanto) have suggested eo_EU > which I don't think is appropriate for a universal language...
Paul Eggert suggested to use "eo": http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2002-07/msg00147.html I think "eo" is the nice choice instead of eo_XX because AA_BB means AA: langugage, BB: region. If we want to use the regional information with "eo" locale, we can override it with LC_* (ex: LC_MONETARY and so on) over LANG environment variable. How about this idea? Regards, -- gotom