Re: Translations to be commited- Manx

2010-10-18 Thread Manx Translators
Hello Andre, I searched the po file for those strings but couldn't find them. Do I have to do something to get this to work? Thankyou, Reuben On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote: Hi Reuben, Am Samstag, den 16.10.2010, 15:02 +0200 schrieb Manx Translators:

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Kenneth Nielsen
2010/10/16 daniel g. siegel dgsie...@gnome.org: On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 03:05 +0200, Kenneth Nielsen wrote: 2010/10/15 daniel g. siegel dgsie...@gnome.org: On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 16:47 +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote: Hi! As much as I'd like to claim it, I don't think we can achieve

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Kenneth Nielsen
Hallo everyone I think this thread is about reaching the length where we need to make something happen, or nothing will come of it and we are all doomed to repeat the whole thing the next time this issue arises. So lets try and sum up: The solution of having a translations only copy of a module

Re: Translations to be commited- Manx

2010-10-18 Thread Andre Klapper
Hi, Am Montag, den 18.10.2010, 09:43 +0200 schrieb Manx Translators: Hello Andre, I searched the po file for those strings but couldn't find them. Do I have to do something to get this to work? Open your two translations in the browser and see the first lines:

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Johannes Schmid
Hi! Then we can afterwards continue discussing whether we should/need to add an offer for a external translation framework that is also GNOME approved (e.g. Transifex, Launchpad ,). Note that Transifex is not an *external* solution as we would host our own Transifex service on GNOME

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Kenneth Nielsen
2010/10/18 Johannes Schmid j...@jsschmid.de: Hi! Then we can afterwards continue discussing whether we should/need to add an offer for a external translation framework that is also GNOME approved (e.g. Transifex, Launchpad ,). Note that Transifex is not an *external* solution as we

Re: Translations to be commited- Manx

2010-10-18 Thread Manx Translators
Hello Andre, Sorry about that, it probably occurred because i adapted it from a po file from Ubuntu. I'll fix it shortly. Thank you, Reuben On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, Am Montag, den 18.10.2010, 09:43 +0200 schrieb Manx Translators: Hello

New tranlsations to be commited- Manx

2010-10-18 Thread Manx Translators
Hello all, Can someone please commit the following translations at http://l10n.gnome.org/vertimus/empathy/gnome-2-32/po/gv and at http://l10n.gnome.org/vertimus/empathy/master/po/gvhttp://l10n.gnome.org/vertimus/empathy/master/po/gv . Under the comment Here is the latest. I had a problem with

Re: New tranlsations to be commited- Manx

2010-10-18 Thread Andre Klapper
Am Montag, den 18.10.2010, 13:56 +0200 schrieb Manx Translators: Can someone please commit the following translations at http://l10n.gnome.org/vertimus/empathy/gnome-2-32/po/gv and at http://l10n.gnome.org/vertimus/empathy/master/po/gv. FIRST AUTHOR should actually be your name instead. Hmm,

Re: 2010 Q3 GNOME Quarterly Report

2010-10-18 Thread Og Maciel
Looks really good to me! -- Og B. Maciel GNOME Foundation Board of Directors omac...@foresightlinux.org ogmac...@gnome.org ogmac...@ubuntu.com GPG Keys: D5CFC202 http://www.ogmaciel.com (en_US) http://blog.ogmaciel.com (pt_BR) ___ gnome-i18n mailing

Re: New tranlsations to be commited- Manx

2010-10-18 Thread Manx Translators
Hello Andre, Sorry about this, what I did was translate empathy in launchpad for Ubuntu first and then adapted the po file with the empathy gnome pot file.I don't know what happened but it seems like it still kept the copyright string from ubuntu. I then removed it not knowing that there was now

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Michael Terry
On 18 October 2010 06:12, Kenneth Nielsen k.nielse...@gmail.com wrote: [snip details] So at this point, can we agree that this can be ONE acceptable solution? Then we could start working setting up the framework for it and actually implement it for the modules that are ok with it. Then we can

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Dimitris Glezos
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Kenneth Nielsen k.nielse...@gmail.com wrote: The solution of having a translations only copy of a module in gnome git, combined with some sort of automatic syncing back and forth, seems to a good solution for the module maintainers that don't mind having this

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Shaun McCance
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 18:11 +0300, Dimitris Glezos wrote: Now, having said this, I just realized a potential issue with Tx GNOME. Tx 1.0 does NOT support intltool projects which do not have a POT file. More information at the following pages:

Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N

2010-10-18 Thread Dimitris Glezos
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Shaun McCance sha...@gnome.org wrote: On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 18:11 +0300, Dimitris Glezos wrote: Now, having said this, I just realized a potential issue with Tx GNOME. Tx 1.0 does NOT support intltool projects which do not have a POT file. More information at