Re: [l10n process] PLEASE READ : OpenOffice.org Translation

2006-05-02 Thread Ivo Hinkelmann
Hi, Jörg Jahnke wrote: My guessing is that the community would prefer the IZ issue attachments as this would be more transparent for OOo members. Ivo: What is your opinion? Would it save you a lot of work if Ian already imported the files? depends on ... If we are in the context of weekly /

Re: [l10n process] PLEASE READ : OpenOffice.org Translation

2006-05-02 Thread Damien Donlon
Hi All, Well we received 285 words of test translation at the weekend! : http://86.43.75.142/oo-translation/stats/HEAD/index.html Equally importantly, we received plenty of excellent feedback. Thanks everyone for providing it. The main issues highlighted by testing so far are : - the colour co

Re: [l10n process] PLEASE READ : OpenOffice.org Translation

2006-05-02 Thread Jörg Jahnke
Hi Damien, Damien Donlon schrieb: On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 12:17, Jörg Jahnke wrote: Hi Damien, one quick question: The HowTo page tells in "Testing Content in Builds" that "The PO content from the CVS server will be automatically backconverted to GSI files for inclusion in builds o

Re: [l10n process] PLEASE READ : OpenOffice.org Translation

2006-05-02 Thread Damien Donlon
On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 12:17, Jörg Jahnke wrote: > Hi Damien, > > one quick question: The HowTo page tells in "Testing Content in > Builds" that "The PO content from the CVS server will be automatically > backconverted to GSI files for inclusion in builds on a daily basis > and provided via the pag

Re: [l10n process] PLEASE READ : OpenOffice.org Translation

2006-05-02 Thread Jörg Jahnke
Hi Damien, one quick question: The HowTo page tells in "Testing Content in Builds" that "The PO content from the CVS server will be automatically backconverted to GSI files for inclusion in builds on a daily basis and provided via the pages above." Is this part of the process already availabl

Re: [l10n process] Re: PLEASE READ : OpenOffice.org Translation

2006-05-02 Thread Damien Donlon
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 23:01, Pavel Janík wrote: >From: Damien Donlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 05:36:14 +0100 > > First note: > >> Note: I am particularly interested to get peoples thoughts on >> treatment of broken files. > > Could be very simple: just do check