Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
Abel Cheung írta: Hi all, I have done the necessary changes to switch to 2.18 release and drop 2.14 branch data form status pages. It's ready for commit. If anyway still like 2.14 to be there, please shout aloud, otherwise I'll go ahead and commit the change (and pray). Abel This week, 2.17.2 is due to be out. Perhaps it's really time to replace 2.14 with 2.18. Regards Gabor Kelemen ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
On 07/11/2006, at 9:07 PM, Gabor Kelemen wrote: Abel Cheung írta: Hi all, I have done the necessary changes to switch to 2.18 release and drop 2.14 branch data form status pages. It's ready for commit. If anyway still like 2.14 to be there, please shout aloud, otherwise I'll go ahead and commit the change (and pray). Abel This week, 2.17.2 is due to be out. Perhaps it's really time to replace 2.14 with 2.18. That's certainly the way it looks from our POV. However, I'm beginning to realize that things may be different for our users. I've just translated the release-notes for Debian Etch, the new Debian system which will be out this December. It proudly announced that it included GNOME 2.14 ! I gather Ubuntu did the same. So we're going to receive feedback and bug reports on GNOME 2.14 files from a large section of our user- base. I don't understand why the distros don't release the current GNOME version, but it means we do need to maintain and update what to so many users is the latest GNOME: GNOME 2.14. In effect, that leaves us working actively on three GNOME branches: the upcoming version (HEAD or 2.18), the latest release (2.16), and what the distros release as the latest release (2.14). :S from Clytie (vi-VN, Vietnamese free-software translation team / nhóm Việt hóa phần mềm tự do) http://groups-beta.google.com/group/vi-VN PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
On 10/7/06, Priit Laes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can't we have both 2.18 and 2.14? If the problem is the amount of time/power what it takes to generate the statistics - generation frequency could be decreased for 2.14 series (once a few days or even a week). Currently all branches are regenerated in one shot, and can't separate without changes from Carlos' machine. Adding 2.14 basically means the time required to regenerate everything is multiplied by 1.5, though I don't really know the impact of additional loading on the machines. That looks like a black box to me. Abel Keeping things near 100% is easier for me rather than discovering next to string freeze that I have lots of modules near 50%. PS. Sorry, Wouter, my bad that you were the only one to receive this letter ;) Cheers, Priit ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n -- Abel Cheung (GPG Key: 0xC67186FF) Key fingerprint: 671C C7AE EFB5 110C D6D1 41EE 4152 E1F1 C671 86FF * GNOME Hong Kong - http://www.gnome.hk/ * Opensource Application Knowledge Assoc. - http://oaka.org/ * My own cave: http://me.abelcheung.org/ ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-10-04 kell 23:42, kirjutas Wouter Bolsterlee: 2006-10-04 klockan 21:10 skrev Abel Cheung: On 10/5/06, Wouter Bolsterlee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have done the necessary changes to switch to 2.18 release and drop 2.14 branch data form status pages. It's ready for commit. If anyway still like 2.14 to be there, please shout aloud, otherwise I'll go ahead and commit the change (and pray). It's hard to draw the line here. Can't we have both 2.18 and 2.14? If the problem is the amount of time/power what it takes to generate the statistics - generation frequency could be decreased for 2.14 series (once a few days or even a week). Keeping things near 100% is easier for me rather than discovering next to string freeze that I have lots of modules near 50%. PS. Sorry, Wouter, my bad that you were the only one to receive this letter ;) Cheers, Priit ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
2006-10-04 klockan 19:01 skrev Abel Cheung: I have done the necessary changes to switch to 2.18 release and drop 2.14 branch data form status pages. It's ready for commit. If anyway still like 2.14 to be there, please shout aloud, otherwise I'll go ahead and commit the change (and pray). Please don't remove the gnome-2-14 branches right now. Several large distributions are shipping this version and sometimes it's useful to have the translations available from the l10n-status pages when handling translation issues reported bye users. mvrgr, Wouter -- :wq mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] web http://uwstopia.nl signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
On 10/5/06, Wouter Bolsterlee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have done the necessary changes to switch to 2.18 release and drop 2.14 branch data form status pages. It's ready for commit. If anyway still like 2.14 to be there, please shout aloud, otherwise I'll go ahead and commit the change (and pray). Please don't remove the gnome-2-14 branches right now. Several large distributions are shipping this version and sometimes it's useful to have the translations available from the l10n-status pages when handling translation issues reported bye users. While I agree this is a valid reason to preserve it, here comes another question: how to decide? - Ubuntu dapper could be using 2.14 for _3_ straight years - Mandriva, if following its 1-yr release schedule, may not ship 2.18 at all - Solaris (well, I don't even know its release schedule) - ... It's hard to draw the line here. Abel mvrgr, Wouter -- :wq mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] web http://uwstopia.nl -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFI/nLP7QTTiUKY+sRAuDUAKDE0eZurFNEM9mrVHiare8frLk4CgCbBGGm gLJDEXoFredZ9+GnACib3c0= =pTTv -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n -- Abel Cheung (GPG Key: 0xC67186FF) Key fingerprint: 671C C7AE EFB5 110C D6D1 41EE 4152 E1F1 C671 86FF * GNOME Hong Kong - http://www.gnome.hk/ * Opensource Application Knowledge Assoc. - http://oaka.org/ * My own cave: http://me.abelcheung.org/ ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: RFC: going to add 2.18 branch
2006-10-04 klockan 21:10 skrev Abel Cheung: On 10/5/06, Wouter Bolsterlee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have done the necessary changes to switch to 2.18 release and drop 2.14 branch data form status pages. It's ready for commit. If anyway still like 2.14 to be there, please shout aloud, otherwise I'll go ahead and commit the change (and pray). Please don't remove the gnome-2-14 branches right now. Several large distributions are shipping this version and sometimes it's useful to have the translations available from the l10n-status pages when handling translation issues reported bye users. While I agree this is a valid reason to preserve it, here comes another question: how to decide? - Ubuntu dapper could be using 2.14 for _3_ straight years - Mandriva, if following its 1-yr release schedule, may not ship 2.18 at all - Solaris (well, I don't even know its release schedule) - ... It's hard to draw the line here. Agreed, those decisions need some thought. However, with 2.16.1 only just released, having the previous release on the status pages does not seem a 'curiosity for the historicians among us', but rather an overview of 'what do normal users see right now'. mvrgr, Wouter -- :wq mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] web http://uwstopia.nl never thought i'd fill with desire-- placebo signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
