Re: Release set inclusion criteria?
Le mardi 11 septembre 2012 à 03:55 -0400, Chris Leonard a écrit : > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Claude Paroz wrote: > > >> The importance of this is that WebKitGTK+ is not presently a member of > >> any Release Set (other than OLPC) and it is not getting the L10n it > >> deserves. > >> > >> Yes, it is absolutely true that WebKitGTK+ has other issues with it's > >> i18n at present, but making it more visible can only help that i18n > >> issue get the attention it requires. > > > > There are several other external packages that contain visible strings > > in GNOME (notably those hosted on the Translation Project). We (I?) > > choose at some point to limit ourselves to GNOME git + some freedesktop > > translation stats. It's somewhat arbitrary and we can decide to change > > it or add more exceptions. But generally-speaking I find it rather > > frustrating to have statistics on packages you may have to wait several > > months before anyone react upstream :-/ > > > > As for WebKitGTK+, it's not an option to make it more visible until DL > > can generate a proper POT file. The last time it succeeded was on > > 2010-12-27! > > Yes, I am painfully aware of the failure of WebKitGTK+ to provide an > adequate fix for their i18n issue. Part of my reasoning for wanting > it to make it more visible (other than the fact that all GNOME-based > web-browsing depends on it) is to draw greater attention to the i18n > issue. Hey Gil, stuff for your next blog post :-) Claude ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Release set inclusion criteria?
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Claude Paroz wrote: >> The importance of this is that WebKitGTK+ is not presently a member of >> any Release Set (other than OLPC) and it is not getting the L10n it >> deserves. >> >> Yes, it is absolutely true that WebKitGTK+ has other issues with it's >> i18n at present, but making it more visible can only help that i18n >> issue get the attention it requires. > > There are several other external packages that contain visible strings > in GNOME (notably those hosted on the Translation Project). We (I?) > choose at some point to limit ourselves to GNOME git + some freedesktop > translation stats. It's somewhat arbitrary and we can decide to change > it or add more exceptions. But generally-speaking I find it rather > frustrating to have statistics on packages you may have to wait several > months before anyone react upstream :-/ > > As for WebKitGTK+, it's not an option to make it more visible until DL > can generate a proper POT file. The last time it succeeded was on > 2010-12-27! Yes, I am painfully aware of the failure of WebKitGTK+ to provide an adequate fix for their i18n issue. Part of my reasoning for wanting it to make it more visible (other than the fact that all GNOME-based web-browsing depends on it) is to draw greater attention to the i18n issue. It is with sorrow that I understand localizers staying away from WebKitGTK+ work, but I feel that the fact that WebKitGTK+ is somewhat "hidden" by not appearing in any DL release set is only aiding and abetting the failure of the WebKitGTK+ i18n when we should be shining a harsh spotlight on this long-standing issue. cjl ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Release set inclusion criteria?
Le lundi 10 septembre 2012 à 19:48 -0400, Chris Leonard a écrit : > Dear Release Set maintainers, > > What exactly qualifies a package for inclusion in the Release Set > "External Dependencies (GNOME)"? Hi Chris, The "(GNOME)" part implies that the code is hosted in the GNOME git infrastructure. > Given that Epiphany Web Browser > http://l10n.gnome.org/module/epiphany/ > > has a dependency on WebKitGTK+ (and it's L10n), does WebKitGTK+ > qualify for that or some other more prominent Release Set? > > http://l10n.gnome.org/module/webkit/ > > Note these tickets (from Epiphany dev asking for WebKitGTK+ L10n): > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=610094%2C+610095%2C+610102%2C+610103%2C+610106%2C+610109%2C+610110%2C+610111%2C+610112%2C+610113%2C+610115%2C+610118%2C+610120%2C+610125%2C+610128%2C+610129%2C+610135%2C+610138%2C+610139%2C+610142%2C+610144%2C+610145%2C+610146%2C+610147%2C+610149%2C+610150%2C+610151%2C+610153%2C+610155%2C+610158%2C+610159%2C+610160%2C+610161%2C+610162%2C+610163%2C+610164%2C+610165 > > The importance of this is that WebKitGTK+ is not presently a member of > any Release Set (other than OLPC) and it is not getting the L10n it > deserves. > > Yes, it is absolutely true that WebKitGTK+ has other issues with it's > i18n at present, but making it more visible can only help that i18n > issue get the attention it requires. There are several other external packages that contain visible strings in GNOME (notably those hosted on the Translation Project). We (I?) choose at some point to limit ourselves to GNOME git + some freedesktop translation stats. It's somewhat arbitrary and we can decide to change it or add more exceptions. But generally-speaking I find it rather frustrating to have statistics on packages you may have to wait several months before anyone react upstream :-/ As for WebKitGTK+, it's not an option to make it more visible until DL can generate a proper POT file. The last time it succeeded was on 2010-12-27! Claude -- www.2xlibre.net ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Release set inclusion criteria?
Dear Release Set maintainers, What exactly qualifies a package for inclusion in the Release Set "External Dependencies (GNOME)"? Given that Epiphany Web Browser http://l10n.gnome.org/module/epiphany/ has a dependency on WebKitGTK+ (and it's L10n), does WebKitGTK+ qualify for that or some other more prominent Release Set? http://l10n.gnome.org/module/webkit/ Note these tickets (from Epiphany dev asking for WebKitGTK+ L10n): https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=610094%2C+610095%2C+610102%2C+610103%2C+610106%2C+610109%2C+610110%2C+610111%2C+610112%2C+610113%2C+610115%2C+610118%2C+610120%2C+610125%2C+610128%2C+610129%2C+610135%2C+610138%2C+610139%2C+610142%2C+610144%2C+610145%2C+610146%2C+610147%2C+610149%2C+610150%2C+610151%2C+610153%2C+610155%2C+610158%2C+610159%2C+610160%2C+610161%2C+610162%2C+610163%2C+610164%2C+610165 The importance of this is that WebKitGTK+ is not presently a member of any Release Set (other than OLPC) and it is not getting the L10n it deserves. Yes, it is absolutely true that WebKitGTK+ has other issues with it's i18n at present, but making it more visible can only help that i18n issue get the attention it requires. cjl ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
