toutdoux-list
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ToutDoux-list] Re: toutdoux translations, discussing


From: Christian Rose
Subject: [ToutDoux-list] Re: toutdoux translations, discussing
Date: 26 Mar 2003 02:15:55 +0100

tis 2003-03-25 klockan 13.42 skrev Mathieu Roy:
> > My intent was never to have a discussion! My intent was to have a simple
> > answer on the question "are you fine with using the TP or do you want to
> > use the GTP?", in order to know what to do with the existing
> > translations and where to direct interested translators in the future.
> > Discussing general project plans is up to the maintainers, my interest
> > is just what translation project Toutdoux will use and a simple answer
> > to that question.
> > 
> > It seems we finally have an answer (and I will send you a tarball with
> > the existing translations in a seperate mail), but it's very sad that it
> > had to take so much unnecessary discussion to get a simple answer.
> > Toutdoux is not the only non-GNOME-cvs application that we are removing
> > from the GTP in order to not to conflict with the TP, but all other
> > maintainers that have replied managed to do so with simple answers,
> > telling me that it was ok for them to use the TP, that their application
> > was dead, or that they would move to GNOME cvs.
> 
> I'm not ToutDoux maintainer at all. That's why I was unable to give
> you a simple and definitive answer. 

Understandable. Perhaps clarifying that fact at the same time with your
cryptic answer would have helped.


> However, I answered to your first  message (link below) to 
>         - tell you what may be Philippe's position (that he confirmed
>           later)

What you replied with was my own words with GNU interspersed. Hardly a
reply on whether you were ok with using the Translation Project.


>         - give you his valid email address

That was indeed helpful. Thanks.


> That said, I still do not think this message requires only a simple
> boolean answer.

I was hoping for maintainers to ideally discuss among themselves and
then arrive with a simple answer (or, if required, a request for more
information about the choices or how to proceed). So yes, a simple
boolean answer (after any amount of private discussion) was preferred.
As I've repeated numerous times, I need(ed) that information in order to
know what to do with the translations. That's all. I'm not at all
interested in wasting my time with discussing general project plans for
a project I'm not familiar with to begin with, or taking any side in
such a discussion.
The background information about the choices and how they fit in was
only intended as a help in deciding what translation project to use.


> I tried to tell you for instance that your "1)" is not
> so obvious and tried to demonstrate that what you wrote can be exactly
> right in others circonstances too, outside GNOME. You are free to care
> about that or not. I do care, that's why I expressed my point of view.

And your point of view on whether GNOME can or could be easily be
replaced with GNU, or anything else for that matter, in what I said was
totally irrelevant to the question I asked.


> In some way, it's similar to talking about using BitKeeper. For some
> persons, it's just a technical choice and discussions are
> unnecessary. For others, it have important implications.
> Do not think that I associate spiritually someone with BitKeeper,
> that's not the point. It's just one example that shows that some
> people think some things need to be discussed while others do
> absolutely not.

So now you're making this into a discussion about what version control
system to use... *Please* stop turning this question into any possible
number of discussions. What I want(ed) is an answer to the question on
whether you were going to use GNOME resources or would be ok with using
the Translation Project. That's all.


> Finally, the tarball should be sent to Philippe directly, at
> address@hidden 

It seems I already sent it to Philippe Roy <address@hidden on the
20th of February. Should I resend it to address@hidden ?


> I'll tell him to check his mail the next time I got him on the phone,
> if he doesn't do it before.

That would indeed be helpful. Instead of all these other discussions.
Thanks.


Christian






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]