Am 04/29/2014 09:47 AM, schrieb jan i:
On 29 April 2014 09:36, Jürgen Schmidt<jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/29/14 9:20 AM, Tal Daniel wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
I propose that, once a language reaches our release quality criteria
(currently: UI translation at 100% and maintained), we do not drop it
afterwards for the other minor releases.
[...] I would remove unmaintained languages only when version 5.0 comes.
Seems reasonable, to me, Andrea, I'm not sure that removing a language on
major release should be so strict. What about removing a language only
when
a MINIMUM% of it isn't translated (e.g., 10%)?
we had something like this before but defined a new rule to be 100% UI
complete and I think this is quite easy and a good rule.
The case Andrea described above should be more theoretical if an active
community is behind a translation. We released Arabic with 3.4 but there
was no active community and nothing happened later on.
I would still prefer the 100% rule. But anyway it's my personal opinion.
+1, not requiring 100% UI (which is quite easy to do for any translator) is
a dangerous path.
Nobody can today say when we do the next major release (5.x) meaning
translations< 100% could be ongoing for a long period. For a minor
release, its typically only a handful of messages that are changed, so it
not a big workload for any individual.
However, from the view point of a normal user who just wants to update
to the next version, it would be confusing why no localized install file
is available anymore.
So, from my side a clear +1 to keep these languages.
How much we allow to be under 100% is just a question of definition (and
agreement). ;-)
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
