Re: Coordinating package meta-data translation

[Ludovic Courtès]

Benno Schulenberg <address@hidden> skribis:

> On 2014-06-09 00:07, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Saluton, Benno,
>> 
>> Benno Schulenberg <address@hidden> skribis:
>>> As will be clear from the above, I would not want to synchronize but
>>> draw a strict dividing line: decide who should translate what, and
>>> use those translations everywhere where the strings occur.
>> 
>> Okay, that makes sense.
>> 
>> Honestly, I’m not thrilled by the idea of having to deal with two
>> translation sources.
>
> It's only slightly harder than dealing with a single source.  You
> automate things.  Have a look at the bootstrap script in for example
> grep.  All you do is send out a POT file (and in this case two, to
> two different addresses), and at the time of rolling a release
> tarball, the script takes care of fetching and merging any available
> translations.

OK.

>> Besides, would you suggest using different text domains for package
>> meta-data and for strings of the Guix tools?
>
> Precisely.  The ideal would be to have two POT files for Guix, one
> with the interface strings, guix.pot, and one with all the package
> descriptions, say guix-blurbs.pot.

OK, will do.

> I would propose to send the first to the TP, and the second to GNU web
> translators, as those strings appear also on the web, and Ineiev says
> that those texts must be at least reviewed by the web translators.

Unfortunately, as I wrote, Guix also has descriptions for non-GNU
packages to be translated, which makes this procedure unsuitable.

Or would we need a third text domain?  Or...?

Help welcome!

Ludo’.