On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 12:54:13AM +0200, Michael Vogt wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:42:35PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 02:35:19AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 07:13:21PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > > > >> Would you still accept an ABI change of apt to support description > > > >> translations into etch? > > That's why I considered it so late for uploading to unstable. I didn't > wanted to upload it without real-world testing because of the risk of > having to break the ABI yet again to fix mistakes in the code. > > We may have to recompile the rdepends of libapt anyway because of > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=390189 > (recent g++ upload 4.1.1ds1-14 has a g++ regression)
Debian was always proud because of many software packages. Nevertheless it's a real drawback that package descriptions are only available in English. Many person with no English skills do not know the packages Debian provides and ignored these because of this. Once I installed a system with translated package descriptions for a friend I remember first time users of Debian browsing description just for fun, testing these packages, comparing with other systems, ... Without they never touched aptitude and complained about the usability. Consider how many people whould profit from it! Ten thousands, hundred thousands of users?! Please compare this with possible disadvantages and choose the proper solution! Once it enters testing I would also ask additional users from various lists (not only developers) to properly use and test it and would be willing to help these users to report possible problems. I'm sure many other people (translators and other) would do the same once you consider the changes for Etch. I now subscribed also to the APT bugs and will try my best ... Jens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]