Rethinking Supported language
Hi, I've added notes on this issue in gnome wiki. http://live.gnome.org/TranslationProject/LanguageCompletionStatus Referenced from http://live.gnome.org/TranslationProject. Please comment, fix or add other proposals. Yair. ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Hello I'm not very verbose on the list but I believe I should step in this talk. Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:57:45 +0100 From: Kenneth Nielsen Subject: Re: Rethinking Supported language To: gnome-i18n@gnome.org Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Frankly, I hadn't been convinced by any of the proposals until now. The 80%/50% rules are not perfect, but unless we have some serious method to be more accurate, like Danilo proposed in his D-L HACKING file, I don't see any reason to change it now. +1 +1 for me. And I'll reason it in three different ways: 1st - The Typical users don't use localized Dev Tools argument 2nd - Size of teams and 80% difficulty 3rd - GNOME Global Team motivation and perceived product quality Disclaimer: Portuguese is at 100% * The Typical users don't use localized Dev Tools argument This may be true in some north european countries that have language roots similar to those of the english language. But it is not true for south european languages, like Portuguese, that are latin based, for instance. Nor for other parts of the globe where Linux is having great adoption. Even if in the begining of IT developers would only have english tools, with the i18n and L10n evolution, current university students are becoming more and more used to have books and tools on their native language. Then some expressions are adapted to native words, some rare expressions are kept as the original. But the tools are native. One last point is concerned with what is the main target for GNOME and Linux on the desktop on each country. Using Portugal as an example, until recently Linux on the desktop was used mainly by young people ( _ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008 ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Hi, Here goes my ideas and proposition on this subject. Generally I agree with the idea of the 50%/80% system. But i also think that the current way of counting is not good enough. Not in the sense of why do we count a certain module, but how to count it. The motivation for my proposal are two modules: evolution and libgweather-locations. libgweather-locations has a really really minor influence on the experience of a user using a localized desktop, yet it counts for 10% of the gnome desktop translation - this is absurd. Evolution in contract to the previous is an important part of the desktop experience (for all normal/developers/administrators/... users). Evolution counts for 12% of the translations. But, is Evolution more important then gnome-panel (1.5%), metacity+libwnck (3%), nautilus (3%) or epiphany (2%) ? This leads me to believe that instead of counting total strings we should use weighted counting. The simplest weight could be uniformly on all modules, say 'n' is the number of modules then for each module we count 1/n * percent_of_module. This is fair enough so nobody complains and yet it can be enhanced to give higher weight to more important modules (where such a definition can be agreed upon). Using the below formula: - Hebrew changes from 72% to 79% - Arabic changes from 98% to 96.8% - Dutch changes from 90% to 92% - French keeps on 99% - Catalan keeps on 97% - Irish from 29% to 31% - Japanese keeps on 95% - Swedish keeps on 99% - Russion changes from 93% to 90% - Greek changes from 84% to 83% - Norwegian changes from 64% to 65% - Croatian changes from 45% to 37% - Welsh changes from 72% to 63% - Latvian changes from 78% to 73% - Indonasian changes from 70% to 65% - Albanian changes from 73% to 72% - Georgian changes from 52% to 57% And so on... On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Duarte Loreto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I'm not very verbose on the list but I believe I should step in this talk. Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:57:45 +0100 From: Kenneth Nielsen Subject: Re: Rethinking Supported language To: gnome-i18n@gnome.org Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Frankly, I hadn't been convinced by any of the proposals until now. The 80%/50% rules are not perfect, but unless we have some serious method to be more accurate, like Danilo proposed in his D-L HACKING file, I don't see any reason to change it now. +1 +1 for me. And I'll reason it in three different ways: 1st - The Typical users don't use localized Dev Tools argument 2nd - Size of teams and 80% difficulty 3rd - GNOME Global Team motivation and perceived product quality Disclaimer: Portuguese is at 100% * The Typical users don't use localized Dev Tools argument This may be true in some north european countries that have language roots similar to those of the english language. But it is not true for south european languages, like Portuguese, that are latin based, for instance. Nor for other parts of the globe where Linux is having great adoption. Even if in the begining of IT developers would only have english tools, with the i18n and L10n evolution, current university students are becoming more and more used to have books and tools on their native language. Then some expressions are adapted to native words, some rare expressions are kept as the original. But the tools are native. One last point is concerned with what is the main target for GNOME and Linux on the desktop on each country. Using Portugal as an example, until recently Linux on the desktop was used mainly by young people ( _ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008 ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Regarding the Development tools: Using my suggestion they would count for 6.5% where as they count for 7.7% today. This is not best. Ideally we should also give different weight for different topics. For example: 10% developers platform, 80% desktop, 3% administration tools and 7% developers tools. Ofcourse this is an arbitrary partition. This way a team can choose not to translate a certain section (due to priorities), for example the development tools, but it should keep in mind that it won't be able more than xx% (for example 7%) of the gnome desktop. Yair. On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Yair Hershkovitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Here goes my ideas and proposition on this subject. Generally I agree with the idea of the 50%/80% system. But i also think that the current way of counting is not good enough. Not in the sense of why do we count a certain module, but how to count it. The motivation for my proposal are two modules: evolution and libgweather-locations. libgweather-locations has a really really minor influence on the experience of a user using a localized desktop, yet it counts for 10% of the gnome desktop translation - this is absurd. Evolution in contract to the previous is an important part of the desktop experience (for all normal/developers/administrators/... users). Evolution counts for 12% of the translations. But, is Evolution more important then gnome-panel (1.5%), metacity+libwnck (3%), nautilus (3%) or epiphany (2%) ? This leads me to believe that instead of counting total strings we should use weighted counting. The simplest weight could be uniformly on all modules, say 'n' is the number of modules then for each module we count 1/n * percent_of_module. This is fair enough so nobody complains and yet it can be enhanced to give higher weight to more important modules (where such a definition can be agreed upon). Using the below formula: - Hebrew changes from 72% to 79% - Arabic changes from 98% to 96.8% - Dutch changes from 90% to 92% - French keeps on 99% - Catalan keeps on 97% - Irish from 29% to 31% - Japanese keeps on 95% - Swedish keeps on 99% - Russion changes from 93% to 90% - Greek changes from 84% to 83% - Norwegian changes from 64% to 65% - Croatian changes from 45% to 37% - Welsh changes from 72% to 63% - Latvian changes from 78% to 73% - Indonasian changes from 70% to 65% - Albanian changes from 73% to 72% - Georgian changes from 52% to 57% And so on... On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Duarte Loreto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I'm not very verbose on the list but I believe I should step in this talk. Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:57:45 +0100 From: Kenneth Nielsen Subject: Re: Rethinking Supported language To: gnome-i18n@gnome.org Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Frankly, I hadn't been convinced by any of the proposals until now. The 80%/50% rules are not perfect, but unless we have some serious method to be more accurate, like Danilo proposed in his D-L HACKING file, I don't see any reason to change it now. +1 +1 for me. And I'll reason it in three different ways: 1st - The Typical users don't use localized Dev Tools argument 2nd - Size of teams and 80% difficulty 3rd - GNOME Global Team motivation and perceived product quality Disclaimer: Portuguese is at 100% * The Typical users don't use localized Dev Tools argument This may be true in some north european countries that have language roots similar to those of the english language. But it is not true for south european languages, like Portuguese, that are latin based, for instance. Nor for other parts of the globe where Linux is having great adoption. Even if in the begining of IT developers would only have english tools, with the i18n and L10n evolution, current university students are becoming more and more used to have books and tools on their native language. Then some expressions are adapted to native words, some rare expressions are kept as the original. But the tools are native. One last point is concerned with what is the main target for GNOME and Linux on the desktop on each country. Using Portugal as an example, until recently Linux on the desktop
Re: Rethinking Supported language
But I think that simply removing it is a unnecessary quick and dirty-fix to something which is essentially a start up problem. I don't believe it is a start up problem. You see, we (the Dutch team) aren't about to devote any precious free time to translations that literally no one will use. To make that prioritisation is of course the prerogative off your team. To me (coming from another small west European country, Denmark) it sounds like you may be basing that conclusion on to narrow a sample of users, but I can off course not know that. I mean if I looked around where I am, in a university environment among physicists which have all usually sampled some kind of programming or scripting language and who have all their textbooks in english, I might come to the same conclusion, but if I include the rest of the population it isn't quite so simple. But in the current situation that puts us out of reach of the 100% target, making us look bad, whereas for all intents and purposes, we have full coverage. As someone else suggested, maybe it should be up to the translation team themselves to decide whether their language is supported or not. Sure we could do that, it will just mean that it will become absolutely useless in a marketing or general quality evaluation sense, which I think is a shame. I still think they should be included, but if it is at some point decided to change it, I think I would be much better to make some sort of a weighing system or use a scheme like the one Danilo mentioned earlier in this thread. Regards Kenneth ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
I think that developers is a usergroup that it would be impolity not to include in the group we mentally consider as ordinary users worthy og our attention :) . Considering that at present there is a big difference between the user group composition that GNOME and the GNU/Linux community _would like to have_ (Mr. and Mrs. Olsen that need email, multimedia and internetbrowsing) and the usergroup composition that we actually have (geeks that want IRC, youtube and programming). I think some measure of what we call a supported languge is a good thing. And my own personal opinion is that it should, just as it does now, include the UI translations for everything that is in the GNOME realeases. I fully understand the ones of you that have problems with limited resources, we do too in the Danish team. However it is my experience that we can _maintain_ the UI translations with as little as two people (three is more comfortable) who work only in their sparetime, and still has a socilalife. The problem offcourse is actually getting there, making the 80% so that you only need to do maintenence. But maybe just a litlle patience will do. Maybe if you announce for translators one or two more will show up and the you have a whole other situation. Regards Kenneth Nielsen ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
2008-02-19 klockan 14:55 skrev Wouter Bolsterlee: My proposal is: only use the modules from the developer platform, desktop and administration tools when calculating the 80% coverage statistic (i.e. all module sets but the developer tools). (I'm replying to myself since that is the start of the thread—I'm not replying to any particular message, but to the thread as a whole.) It seems like I have started a debate about whether the Development Tools suite *should* be translated. Speaking for the Dutch community: I don't think the Development Tools suite should be fully translated to be useful for our Dutch speaking users. I'm very aware of the fact that this is different for many other languages. To sum up my opinion/intention: - The modules in Development Tools suite should be translated like any other module. - However, there should be a lower priority for modules in the Development Tools suite than for Desktop and Developer Platform modules, since they're less visible to users. - The '80% rule of thumb' should not take the development tools into account, since the intended audience for localized desktop does not match the intended audience for the modules in the Developer Tools suite. My proposal is really, really simple: Don't count strings in the Developer Tools suite to decide whether a language should show up in the release notes as being 'supported' (i.e. 80% string coverage). That's all. Please stop flaming and wasting other's time and reach consensus. So far I've counted a few people agreeing with my proposal, and a bunch of people flaming about stuff only peripherally related to my proposal. Thoughts? mvrgr, Wouter -- :wq mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] web http://uwstopia.nl i know secrets :: i've never been told -- heather nova signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Le mercredi 20 février 2008 à 13:27 +0100, Johannes Schmid a écrit : Hi! What about a different approach: In the release notes, there should be placeholder for translators to say my language is supported. So everybody translating the release notes will have the chance to put his language and name at the appropriate place, regardless of any 80% rule. Frankly, I hadn't been convinced by any of the proposals until now. The 80%/50% rules are not perfect, but unless we have some serious method to be more accurate, like Danilo proposed in his D-L HACKING file, I don't see any reason to change it now. Claude Am Mittwoch, den 20.02.2008, 13:20 +0100 schrieb Reinout van Schouwen: Op woensdag 20-02-2008 om 12:37 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Wouter Bolsterlee: Don't count strings in the Developer Tools suite to decide whether a language should show up in the release notes as being 'supported' (i.e. 80% string coverage). That's all. +1 Thoughts? Yes, one more thing. For some modules, being fully localized encompasses more than just UI or documentation. IIRC, dasher requires statistics on character frequency in any given language. Productivity apps will need spelling and hyphenation dictionaries, and grammar rules. I haven't tried Orca yet, but I imagine it needs information on how to pronounce words. My point: I believe that applications with special l10n requirements shouldn't be called supported even if just the UI is translated 100%. ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Op woensdag 20-02-2008 om 12:37 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Wouter Bolsterlee: Don't count strings in the Developer Tools suite to decide whether a language should show up in the release notes as being 'supported' (i.e. 80% string coverage). That's all. +1 Thoughts? Yes, one more thing. For some modules, being fully localized encompasses more than just UI or documentation. IIRC, dasher requires statistics on character frequency in any given language. Productivity apps will need spelling and hyphenation dictionaries, and grammar rules. I haven't tried Orca yet, but I imagine it needs information on how to pronounce words. My point: I believe that applications with special l10n requirements shouldn't be called supported even if just the UI is translated 100%. -- Reinout van Schouwen http://vanschouwen.info/ ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Frankly, I hadn't been convinced by any of the proposals until now. The 80%/50% rules are not perfect, but unless we have some serious method to be more accurate, like Danilo proposed in his D-L HACKING file, I don't see any reason to change it now. +1 ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Hi! What about a different approach: In the release notes, there should be placeholder for translators to say my language is supported. So everybody translating the release notes will have the chance to put his language and name at the appropriate place, regardless of any 80% rule. Regards, Johannes Am Mittwoch, den 20.02.2008, 13:20 +0100 schrieb Reinout van Schouwen: Op woensdag 20-02-2008 om 12:37 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Wouter Bolsterlee: Don't count strings in the Developer Tools suite to decide whether a language should show up in the release notes as being 'supported' (i.e. 80% string coverage). That's all. +1 Thoughts? Yes, one more thing. For some modules, being fully localized encompasses more than just UI or documentation. IIRC, dasher requires statistics on character frequency in any given language. Productivity apps will need spelling and hyphenation dictionaries, and grammar rules. I haven't tried Orca yet, but I imagine it needs information on how to pronounce words. My point: I believe that applications with special l10n requirements shouldn't be called supported even if just the UI is translated 100%. signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Hi Kenneth, Op woensdag 20-02-2008 om 13:09 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Kenneth Nielsen: But I think that simply removing it is a unnecessary quick and dirty-fix to something which is essentially a start up problem. I don't believe it is a start up problem. You see, we (the Dutch team) aren't about to devote any precious free time to translations that literally no one will use. But in the current situation that puts us out of reach of the 100% target, making us look bad, whereas for all intents and purposes, we have full coverage. As someone else suggested, maybe it should be up to the translation team themselves to decide whether their language is supported or not. regards, -- Reinout van Schouwen ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Ihar Hrachyshka [EMAIL PROTECTED] a scris: 2008/2/19 Mişu Moldovan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm not against translating them, it's just that they are of no use to regular users. Who are these regular users, hum? Am I not regular? If regular users don't need these tools then - just drop them! If they are there, in official release sets then it's what our users (newbies and photographers aren't better or smth then programmers) need. I'm not against releasing them either... Just don't count their localizations when deciding which language are supported and which are not because most of the users do not use them at all. -- mişu pgpaOATHnW69t.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
2008/2/19 Mişu Moldovan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Wouter Bolsterlee [EMAIL PROTECTED] a scris: Currently, http://www.gnome.org/i18n/ states that a language is officially supported if 80% of the PO files is translated. I think this measure is no longer valid for modern Gnome releases, because of the 'Development Tools' suite. It contains the following modules: - accerciser - anjuta - devhelp - gdl - glade3 - gnome-build I fully agree, the supported status is a big motivator and we in the Romanian team are struggling in each release to push over the 80% barrier. But counting these development tools makes it harder than it should be... I'm not against translating them, it's just that they are of no use to regular users. Who are these regular users, hum? Am I not regular? If regular users don't need these tools then - just drop them! If they are there, in official release sets then it's what our users (newbies and photographers aren't better or smth then programmers) need. -- mişu ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
On Feb 19, 2008 5:14 PM, F Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Op Dinsdag 2008-02-19 skryf Wouter Bolsterlee: Dear all, Currently, http://www.gnome.org/i18n/ states that a language is officially supported if 80% of the PO files is translated. I think this measure is no longer valid for modern Gnome releases, because of the 'Development Tools' suite. It contains the following modules: My proposal is: only use the modules from the developer platform, desktop and administration tools when calculating the 80% coverage statistic (i.e. all module sets but the developer tools). What do you think? mvrgr, Wouter My team is now at less than 15% for 2.22. Obviously I won't even consider translating these ever (or let's be positive: in the foreseeable future :-) There are of course other modules that I consider to be in the same category, and other people might not agree with me. Things like libbonobo and Glib for example. While GNOME grows, catching up from less than 15% might be impossible for a single person with limited time, and ideally we should find ways of making this limited time have the biggest possible impact. In reality, exactly which 20% of the whole is untranslated, can have a big effect on the end-user experience. --help text for example, is not really that important for many users. Anyway, just some extra thoughts. In other words, I agree, Wouter! Good stats and a string with your name in release notes is not the reason to translate I think. The reason is the lack of good translations, isn't it? Of course, we should provide our translators with general directions on priorities of GNOME modules (and as long as I know we do it on Wiki, isn't it?) but... Why i18r's work on l10ning development tool is not worth mentioning in release notes but for orca (accessibility tool) it's worth saying? For you guys who want to see your names in release notes quickly I propose such sentence: GNOME is XX% translated in YYY language, with ZZ% completed for desktop components. And we also should provide a new Module set - Accessibility tools I think. Groete Friedel ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
After reading the discussion, I propose doing away with these labels all together. Scrap them. They seem to be bringing more harm than good, people don't even agree on what the meaning of supported is, what packages to count..etc And it's probably also a per language thing. Different cultures/languages may favour English translations for some languages anyway. Besides, translating to achieve a number doesn't sound right to me. Release notes should probably just say that Thanks to our GNOME translation team, who are doing hard work or something similar, without being specific on numbers. Djihed 2008/2/19 Wouter Bolsterlee [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear all, Currently, http://www.gnome.org/i18n/ states that a language is officially supported if 80% of the PO files is translated. I think this measure is no longer valid for modern Gnome releases, because of the 'Development Tools' suite. It contains the following modules: - accerciser - anjuta - devhelp - gdl - glade3 - gnome-build The problems I see are: 1. None of the programs are intended for regular users. Therefor it's unreasonable to treat them as such when deciding whether a translation is officially supported. 2. Developers will generally use those programs in English anyway. I dare to say that there is not a single Dutch speaking user that wants to a program such as Glade or Accerciser in Dutch. Translating lots of strings that will never be visible to users is just a waste of time. Note that most translation teams have very limited resources. 3. Since those programs contains more than 3000 strings (3144 according to my last count), they account for a substantial part of the total number of strings (somewhere in the around 40.000). This very negatively impacts the percentage indicating the translation coverage. My proposal is: only use the modules from the developer platform, desktop and administration tools when calculating the 80% coverage statistic (i.e. all module sets but the developer tools). What do you think? mvrgr, Wouter -- :wq mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] web http://uwstopia.nl i had no choice :: but to hear you -- alanis morisette -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: This message was signed/encrypted using GnuPG. iD8DBQFHut/eP7QTTiUKY+sRAuvNAJ9upNLwIobRS0+UpT0AtCwNvHPWZQCfQTkG xs0lbzL1bXdnRaOgp4YIYqQ= =ARVF -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Ihar Hrachyshka [EMAIL PROTECTED] a scris: 2008/2/19 Mişu Moldovan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ihar Hrachyshka [EMAIL PROTECTED] a scris: 2008/2/19 Mişu Moldovan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm not against translating them, it's just that they are of no use to regular users. Who are these regular users, hum? Am I not regular? If regular users don't need these tools then - just drop them! If they are there, in official release sets then it's what our users (newbies and photographers aren't better or smth then programmers) need. I'm not against releasing them either... Just don't count their localizations when deciding which language are supported and which are not because most of the users do not use them at all. Most users don't use accessibility features provided by GNOME (and here are 1000 messages!). Most users don't use zenity rapid scripting system and our Windows remote connectivity tools for GNOME. Is it the reason not to count them as a 100% GNOME component? Some people need the accessibility features in order to *use* GNOME. Zenity also has a lot of strings that are exposed when *using* the GNOME desktop. I won't continue, I sense you're looking for a fight and I somewhat understand your concerns now that your team has already translated the dev tools. -- mişu pgpMLKRQpebTx.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Rethinking Supported language
Le mardi 19 février 2008, à 14:55 +0100, Wouter Bolsterlee a écrit : My proposal is: only use the modules from the developer platform, desktop and administration tools when calculating the 80% coverage statistic (i.e. all module sets but the developer tools). What do you think? FWIW, I'd say it's up to you (translators to decide), not the release team :-) The DL documentation that Danilo mentioned makes a lot of sense to me. Any volunteer to implement this? ;-) Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
