A person who cannot decide if a string change is semantic or cosmetic to
en-US should not be messing around with the string names in the first
place, if you ask me.
Ok so maybe occasionally they might get it wrong. That still produces a
lot LESS workload to fix that landing 2000 cosmetic en-US changes on 50
locales.
Not a good reason for opposing this approach.
Michael
Sgrìobh Jan Holesovsky na leanas 27/01/2015 aig 14:16:
Because the sources are the ultimate version of the strings. Who would
be deciding if a change should be applied in the sources (ie. it is a
change needed for all languages) and what is just making the original
more consistent? And again - what to do if the person mis-judges?
All the best,
Kendy
--
*Akerbeltz <http://www.faclair.com/>*
Goireasan Gàidhlig air an lìon
Fòn: +44-141-946 4437
Facs: +44-141-945 2701
*Tha Gàidhlig aig a' choimpiutair agad, siuthad, feuch e!*
Iomadh rud eadar prògraman oifis, brabhsairean, predictive texting,
geamannan is mòran a bharrachd. Tadhail oirnn aig www.iGàidhlig.net
<http://www.iGaidhlig.net/>
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.