Re: Conclusion GTP and TP?

[Hasbullah bin Pit <sebol ikhlas com>]

Christian Rose menulis:
> fre 2002-11-01 klockan 19.31 skrev Christian Stimming:
> I vote for "translation for projects hosted at gnome.org should be
> handled by the GTP only, and all others by the TP only". I don't know if
> that's what your a) is.

my vote similar with Christian Rose.
all code hosted in gnome cvs handled by GTP.
reason:
   1. no extra efford require by package manintainer.
   2. all GTP person already have access into it.
   3. translation will become uptodate., can be updated before it release

but freedom for other gnome apps maintainer (who use sf's cvs),
whether to use TP or not.
but if it's at TP, I encourage GTP person to join TP to handle any gnome 
apps there. (dual boot)
i  mean, there are "gnome person" at each language TP project.



> That means, among other things, that I would like us to phase out
> gnome-i18n/extra-po in the future, and convince "foreign" projects to
> either move their sources to gnome cvs, or use the TP for their
> translations. The reason for that is that I think the TP robot is a much
> better solution for projects where translators don't have cvs access to
> the sources anyway, since we can avoid all the trouble of having to
> manually sync the pot files ourselves all the time. Also, if the
> application is proposed for inclusion in a future gnome release, it
> better be moved to gnome cvs, not just for easy access for gnome
> translators, but also for many other good gnome development reasons.
> 
> 
> Christian
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-i18n mailing list
> gnome-i18n@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
> 
>