Hi! What is better to be translated?

Hannie lafeber-dumoleyn2 at zonnet.nl
Sat Aug 7 09:47:25 BST 2010

Op 06-08-10 16:39, Miro Hadzhiev schreef:
> On 06/08/10 17:34, David Planella wrote:
>> Hi Miro,
>> 2010/8/6 Miro Hadzhiev<extigyro at gmail.com>:
>>> What is better to be translated, the package (the trunk package in
>>> Launchpad) or the same package in Ubuntu Lucid, Maverick and so on (that is
>>> to say the specific package which is going to be shipped in the next Ubuntu
>>> version/spin)?
>> As you have well noticed, for those projects hosted as upstream in
>> Launchpad and also shipped in Ubuntu, there are two translation
>> locations:
>> * The upstream project
>> * The Ubuntu source packages (one for each release)
>> Right now, I'd recommend translating the Ubuntu source package from
>> the development version, that is, for Maverick. Once you've done that,
>> you can also go to the upstream project and translate it. Since you
>> will already have done the job for Ubuntu, those translations will
>> appear as suggestions and you will only need to point and click to
>> accept them. So, while not optimal, it is really easy to keep the
>> projects in sync like this.
>> In the near future, Launchpad will do this for you and there will be
>> message sharing between Launchpad upstream projects and the Ubuntu
>> source packages (this is something the developers are actively working
>> on right now)
>> For those who are not aware: message sharing is a really cool feature
>> through which translated messages are shared across series. That is,
>> if you translate a message in Lucid, that same message will be
>> instantly translated in Maverick and even previous releases.
>> As an example of such a project hosted in Launchpad, here's simple scan:
>> Upstream project:
>> https://translations.launchpad.net/simple-scan
>> Ubuntu source packages:
>> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+sources/simple-scan/+translations
>> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+sources/simple-scan/+translations
>> Regards,
>> David.
> A very quick and really useful answer. Thanks, David!
> Miro H.
Hello David,
The example you give here (simple-scan) is quite clear.
Am I right in concluding that, in the case of Aptitude, I am to 
translate this first: 
and that I have to send the downloaded po-file (from LP) to Debian-nl?

You may have followed the discussion about something similar in the 
thread 'Is Aptitude upstream?

Onhttps://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/maverick/+lang/nl/  I find many templates that should not be translated by us, Ubuntu Dutch Translation Team. With Gnome and KDE it is not so difficult, because it is usually in the name. But with others I am not sure if we should translate them or not. One of them is Aptitude. Is this upstream (Debian), or not?
In fact, only few of the 1340 templates are NOT upstream (e.g. (K)Ubuntu-docs, software-center, app-install-data).
Would it not be a good idea to mention in the list of templates whether it is upstream or Ubuntu?
Hannie Dumoleyn

In general, you should translate any template where translations are 
still missing, no matter if they come from upstream or they are native 
to Ubuntu. (Part of the answer by Arne Goetje)

I have another question about this: I checked a few KDE templates (I am 
also a member of the kde-nl translation team). Example: Koffice. This 
has been fully translated at KDE, but not in Launchpad. Will the fully 
translated KDE-version be imported into LP eventually? And if so, then 
why should I finish the unfinished version on LP?

I am really at a loss here, because I do not know what to translate from 
the list on
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-translators/attachments/20100807/d04ffe13/attachment-0001.htm 

More information about the ubuntu-translators mailing list