RFC: pt_BR vs. pt -- langpack split and fallback languages

Susana Pereira susana.pereira at gmail.com
Sun Jun 21 20:22:24 BST 2009

Hi Arne,

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Arne Goetje <arne.goetje at canonical.com> wrote:
> (...)
> Thanks. :)
> Where is your mailing list located?

Our mailing-list is tradutores at ubuntu-pt.org

We have a few questions for you.

1) Besides fixing a few bugs and perhaps saving some disk space are
there any other advantages in splitting the packages?

2) Although we translate msgids separately and most of them contain
many differences, we like the current behavior of having pt_BR as a
fallback language. If we make the split and keep the fallback settings
then the user would have to manually install pt_BR support for the
fallback to work. We consider this a big disadvantage. Is there a way
to make the split but still have a meta-package that recommends pt and
pt_BR so we can solve this issue?

We've been experiencing a lot of bugs lately where some translations
are mixed with brazilian ones and we would like to solve that, but
losing pt_BR as a fallback language is not ok for us. If the
meta-package solution is possible then that's the way to go.  If not,
then we prefer to keep pt and pt_BR shipped in the same language-pack.

I spoke to the brazilian team and they prefer having pt as a fallback
language too (pt_BR:pt:pt_PT). I'm CC'ing André from the Brazilian
Team so he can confirm.



> Cheers
> Arne
> --
> ubuntu-translators mailing list
> ubuntu-translators at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators

More information about the ubuntu-translators mailing list