Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N
- From: Michael Terry <mike mterry name>
- To: Kenneth Nielsen <k nielsen81 gmail com>
- Cc: GNOME i18n list <gnome-i18n gnome org>, desktop-devel-list <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N
- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:23:08 -0400
On 18 October 2010 06:12, Kenneth Nielsen <k nielsen81 gmail com> wrote:
> 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 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 ,....).
I can offer as the maintainer of one of the proposed GNOME
Applications that is hosted on Launchpad (deja-dup) to be a guinea pig
for that leg of the work.
You mentioned that this approach would be no additional work for
translators in GNOME. I can add that it would also be no additional
work for Launchpad maintainers because they already work with
translation branches that they merge before a release. So from that
perspective, I like this idea too.
] [Thread Prev