Re: gtk+ non-update

[Clytie Siddall <clytie riverland net au>]

On 17/04/2006, at 5:22 PM, Gora Mohanty wrote:

> To answer part of your question, there is usually a good reason that
> some packages have a different numbering scheme, usually because they
> are also used independently of GNOME.

In some cases, perhaps, but not in all. I've corresponded with  
developers about this, who've said they didn't realize how it  
affected translators, and it didn't make any difference to them, so  
next time they would use the standard branches/nomenclature.

So keeping it to an absolute minority would help. :)

> I also found remembering unusual
> branch names a problem, till I realised that one could get the
> appropriate branch name from l10n-status.gnome.org, for the particular
> version of GNOME to which the commits are to be made. Maybe this fact
> needs to go into the GNOME translator's HOW-TO.

I know you can see the branch on the status page, but when you are  
doing a lot of updates, continually, it is easy to forget that there  
are a few files which don't fit the pattern. I certainly don't go  
back to the status pages every time I update and commit a file, and I  
don't think it's efficient to build that into our workflow.

The most useful reminder is the filename, which contains the branch,  
and is an active part of the translation task. However, for these  
few, non-standard files, it's easy to forget to check the filename  
every time, too.

It's not all that useful to have a standard way of doing things, if  
some people ignore it.

from Clytie (vi-VN, Vietnamese free-software translation team / nhÃm  
Viát hÃa phán mám tá do)
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/vi-VN