Angolan and Cape Verdean users

[Og Maciel]

Hey Matt,

Going back to the stats I got from LP, it seems that the Brazilian PT
translation is by far more advanced than the other 2 branches.  If we
can get a hold of the pt_PT admin and receive his consent, could we
turn the pt_BR the default portuguese language pack, rename it to be
PT only, and remove any other pt remaining?  I'm putting myself at the
service of the portuguese speaking community to then spearhead,
together with volunteers from all branches, to unify it.  Anyone
against it?  From the technical POV, could someone do this (from
Rosetta, LP, etc) with me?

Cheers,

Og

On 2/17/06, Matthew East <mdke at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 15:39 +0000, Matthew East wrote:
> > Jordi, copying you into this from the middle of an ubuntu-translators
> > thread.
> >
> > On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 09:32 -0500, Og Maciel wrote:
> > > Don't know who did the inicial setup and/or who chose to break the
> > > languages apart, but here are some interesting facts about the
> > > portuguese language translations under Breezy:
> > >
> > > Portuguese           071.61 26.6 percent published, 0.1 percent changed,
> > > 1.69 percent new, 71.61 percent untranslated
> > >
> > > Portuguese (Brazil)         060.55 35.64 percent published, 0.11 percent
> > > changed, 3.7 percent new, 60.55 percent untranslated
> > >
> > > Portuguese (Portugal)       098.48 1.38 percent published, 0.01 percent
> > > changed, 0.14 percent new, 98.48 percent untranslated
> > >
> > > Obviously a lot of re-inventing the wheel going here...  The same can
> > > be seen in other languages as well, such as English, Russian, French,
> > > Spanish, etc, etc...
> > >
> > > I'd like to hear back from soneone from LP about the possibility of
> > > being able to, with consent from individual team administrators, merge
> > > untranslated strings into one major Breezy .po if you will, so that
> > > people who choose to use a language pack that hasn't really been
> > > worked on can at least have the base?  Or maybe stop the Babel Tower
> > > madness and consolidate translations into groups (i.e. all pt_* into
> > > one) *until* every single package gets transtlated!  Then, and only
> > > then, we could break them up for personalization based on individual
> > > dialects?
> >
> > That sounds like a very good idea to me. I have no doubt that merging
> > translations, with the permission of all groups concerned, is possible.
> > Jordi will no doubt know more.
>
> A user has just pointed out to me (off-list) that merging dialects into
> a base language translation is a bad idea, because it will have dialect
> specific strings in it. That must be right.
>
> I think the correct approach is for translators who are working on
> dialects to contribute to the base translations too, before doing
> dialect specific work. Naturally, not everyone will want to do this, but
> if there is a greater amount of collaboration in general, that will
> help, I think.
>
> This is all based on the assumption (I don't know much about this) that
> the base language is the fallback language where an application is not
> translated for a particular dialect.
>
> Matt
> --
> mdke at ubuntu.com
> gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBD9fw5tSaF0w5rBv8RApOiAJ9ngzB/ji6008I+1lr14nwnzBc61wCfb8oi
> rsZXHXNDNk1Ds1JNo8o6J0w=
> =CaJC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>


--
Og B. Maciel

ogmaciel at ubuntu.com
ogmaciel at ubuntubrasil.org
og.maciel at gmail.com

GPG Keys: D5CFC202

http://www.ogmaciel.com (en_US)
http://blog.ogmaciel.com (pt_BR)