Re: Release set inclusion criteria?

[Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress gmail com>]

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Claude Paroz <claude 2xlibre net> wrote:

>> The importance of this is that WebKitGTK+ is not presently a member of
>> any Release Set (other than OLPC) and it is not getting the L10n it
>> deserves.
>>
>> Yes, it is absolutely true that WebKitGTK+ has other issues with it's
>> i18n at present, but making it more visible can only help that i18n
>> issue get the attention it requires.
>
> There are several other external packages that contain visible strings
> in GNOME (notably those hosted on the Translation Project). We (I?)
> choose at some point to limit ourselves to GNOME git + some freedesktop
> translation stats. It's somewhat arbitrary and we can decide to change
> it or add more exceptions. But generally-speaking I find it rather
> frustrating to have statistics on packages you may have to wait several
> months before anyone react upstream :-/
>
> As for WebKitGTK+, it's not an option to make it more visible until DL
> can generate a proper POT file. The last time it succeeded was on
> 2010-12-27!

Yes, I am painfully aware of the failure of WebKitGTK+ to provide an
adequate fix for their i18n issue.  Part of my reasoning for wanting
it to make it more visible (other than the fact that all GNOME-based
web-browsing depends on it) is to draw greater attention to the i18n
issue.

It is with sorrow that I understand localizers staying away from
WebKitGTK+ work, but I feel that the fact that WebKitGTK+ is somewhat
"hidden" by not appearing in any DL release set is only aiding and
abetting the failure of the WebKitGTK+ i18n when we should be shining
a harsh spotlight on this long-standing issue.

cjl