How to simplify the process of adding multilingual %descriptions to rpm spec?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 18:36 +0100, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > Translator Goals:
> > 1) Notification of package string changes.
> > 2) Ability to own a package-translation similar to how other packagers
> > own a package.
> As a translator, I don't think this is what I want.
> 1) We already have infrastructure to show translation status, without
>    explicit notification.  Explicit notification would just result in
>    a lot of daily emails.
> All that is necessary is regular (daily/weekly) rebuild of the list of
> strings to translate, and a regular incorrporation of translated
> messages to the repository (in whatever form).
> 
Amendment to #1:
1) Listing of package string changes (As translators often work on a
large number of packages, email notification is going to overwhelm
INBOXes.)


> 2) No, I certainly don't want to handle 1237 separate "translation
>    packages" in 1237 separate files.you don't want me
> The specspo model of a single file actually suits translators quite well
> (e.g. it allows automated translation matching on package renames).
> Maybe we could split the large .po file to allow better collaboration,
> e.g. to 26 .po files, selecting packages by the first letter of their name.

#2 doesn't specify the backend.  #2 specifies that if you are
translating package foo for language hungarian, then you don't want me
to come in and retranslate it.  Do you disagree with this?

But we can add:
3) Ability to edit translations in a single file/location that can be
parsed (if necessary) by the builder into a final form.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20051116/6f13386a/attachment.sig>