Simon Josefsson wrote: > > 3) Two weeks later, we collect the updated translations of the "gnulib" > > domain and publish them at > > ftp.gnu.org:gnu/gnulib/gnulib-l10n-DATE.tar.gz. > > > > 4) Then I notify the various distros of this new package and ask > > them to include it in their distros. > > What would this tarball contain? Just the translations?
Just the POT file and the then-current translations. Try yourself: $ make gnulib-l10n-release The result will be the same as today, just with updated translations from the TP. > I'm helping > with the Debian gnulib package, but I'm wondering if maybe those > translations shouldn't be a separate Debian package if they are not > sharing any of the source code. If you can, and have time to, please help prevent Debian from doing silly things! > I like using DATE-based releases here, > it is really hard to attach any meaningful versioning information to a > project like gnulib let alone translations of gnulib. Yes. Since some projects are using YEAR or YEAR.MONTH as version number, I don't see a problem with YYYYMMDD as version number — which will give us the freedom to refresh the translations when we want to, without getting into fruitless discussions. Bruno
