2009-03-04 klockan 13:21 skrev Anna Jonna Armannsdottir:
> On þri, 2009-03-03 at 14:41 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> > I would also point out that having no freeze break (with requests from
> > the developers, of course) would be bad: having some breaks is a good
> > sign, showing that the development is active and not dead. Of course, we
> > don't want tons of freeze breaks. And of course they should be approved
> > first.
> The responses from the developers indicate quite clearly that they
> are not satisfied with the methods of string freeze.
> Presently a number of developers, are deliberately breaking the
> string freeze and thereby creating trouble for translators.
> The argument seems to be: "We break string freeze because we can".
I wouldn't go as far as stating that the freeze breaks are deliberate.
> Both developers and translators are working on volunteer basis,
> doing their best.
...and this is why. Many people work in their spare time, and in the weeks
before a release they feel more obliged to fix bugs, which, inherently,
sometimes involves changing UI strings.
Personally, I think we're doing quite well for this cycle, with most freeze
breaks happening early in the cycle. It would be interesting to see how many
strings have been changed after the string freeze came into effect, and how
this situation was for earlier releases. Numbers, anyone?
— Wouter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature