Bruno Haible via Gnulib discussion list <bug-gnulib@gnu.org> writes: >> What would this tarball contain? Just the translations? > > Just the POT file and the then-current translations. Try yourself: > $ make gnulib-l10n-release
That seems to require gettext 0.23, so I didn't get a final tarball to
look at.
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> I'm wondering if maybe those
>> translations shouldn't be a separate Debian package if they are not
>> sharing any of the source code.
>
> Note that Debian already has a number of pure localization packages [1]:
...
> It is really not a new concept.
Yes but aren't all of those built from release tarballs with complete
source code from the project, rather than a custom tarball for l10n
purposes?
The binary Debian package that is installed and provides the *.gmo files
is fine to call 'gnulib-l10n', that seems to align with those projects.
But the Debian source package that builds that binary package could be
1) the existing 'gnulib' packages which today contains all of the
gnulib git source code, or
2) a new Debian source package that uses your *.tar.gz as the upstream
source code.
What I was suggesting that 2) is better than trying to hack the l10n
tarball into the current gnulib source package, since we would then need
to use multiple source tarballs -- Debian supports that for a single
package, but it is quite uncommon and hard to work with. But I would
have to look at the l10n tarball and start experimenting with packaging
to know for sure.
Once we agree, I could prepare this as a new 'gnulib-l10n' source/binary
package and upload it. If it is a new source package, it can take up to
~3 months to pass the copyright review process and I suspect the next
Debian release freeze will start in winter.
https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
/Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
