Eddy Petrișor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Matthias Julius wrote: >> Eddy Petrișor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Thomas Huriaux wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (05/03/2007): >>>>> The reviewer sends a message with "[ITT] po-debconf://<package>/en.po" >>>> I would say ITR (Intend to review) instead of ITT (adding tags to the >>>> various bots is a very easy task). >>> Also dropping the final "en.po" seems appropriate. >> >> Instead, use the path of the *.templates file. > > That is not needed since there is only one template per source > package, so is enough to say '[ITR] po-debconf://package'
Well, it depends. There can be multiple *.templates files - one for each binary package. All the strings then get lumped up into one templates.pot. And according to Christian's proposal the reviewers will review the *.templates files. In many cases they might be too small to be worth reviewing separately. But, there are some large ones. At the end the *.templates files should be kept in sync with each other to take advantage of common strings to reduce the work of translators. And translators have to deal with the combined templates.pot anyway. So, my idea above is probably overkill after all. You may just ignore it. Besides, there are few en.po files in the archive. Do those actually make sense? If so you should distinguish between them and templates. One could use pot-debconf://<package>. Matthias
