On 31/05/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 5/31/13 12:34 PM, janI wrote:
My suggestion is clear: add terminology, and request the reveiw function to
be used (meaning that a language need to have passed the review, and
warnings have been controlled, in order to be released).
A good idea and we should indeed work towards such a review process. I
learned today how difficult it can be to translate some specific things.
Adding terminology seems fine, of course. Requiring the review step is
in principle OK for me too, but I wonder how it will work for languages
where we don't have native speakers as committers: does it require that
strings are explicitly marked as reviewed, or is it enough to ask
volunteers to check the warnings generated by Pootle and then send a
note to the l10n list saying that they have considered/ignored warnings
appropriately?
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
