Developers of Sympa

[Olivier Salaün - CRU <address@concealed>]

Jeff Abbott wrote:

> On Dec 1, 2005, at 3:38 PM, Olivier Salaün wrote:
>
> > Fixing the msgstr entries in en_US is a good start and has the  
> > advantage of not disturbing all other translations of Sympa. On the  
> > other end other translations might certainly benefit from a better  
> > (and more precise) English version of  strings to translate.
>
> I've got en_US.po from Rosetta loaded up in Vim as I write this.   
> Would you like me to simply upload the whole, updated en_US.po to  
> Rosetta once I've made my (initially minor) changes, would you prefer  
> a diff, or would you prefer something else entirely?

Actually Rosetta is not always the primary reliable source because their 
upload/download interface is not always fully functional. It it neither 
the best place to submit your updated PO file because they don't provide 
a way for us to be notified of updates/uploads.

I rather suggest that you base your work on the en_US.po that is 
distributed with sympa 5.1.2.
Once you've finished the cleanup, you should send the updated version to 
sympa-translation mailing list or upload it in our bug/feature tracking 
system : http://www.sympa.org/mantis

> > If  we find an easy way  to turn  your changes to msgstr entries of  
> > en_US into a new version of sympa.pot, then it would make things  
> > easier to schedule this work for a later Sympa release.
>
> When I get the time to sit down and do a bulk update of the en_US  
> translations I could work on finding or creating a tool to do this.

Great.
The work consists in editing all web and mail templates to change the 
updated strings.
We already have the tools to then update the sympa.pot file and update 
the corresponding PO files
(basically : cd po/ ; make pot ; make update-po)

> > It sounds like a good idea and please send us patches of any  cleanup 
> > you could perform to both templates and style sheet. We'll  apply 
> > them to the development CVS branch.
>
> What I'd probably be doing is updating/redesigning them on a virtual  
> robot here, so I could get people's feedback on them.  Once I've got  
> them complete and looking such that no one's complaining too loudly  
> then I'll diff them against the source and create a unified patch to  
> make applying it to the upstream easy.

That's fine for us.

Thanks.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature