2013/7/23 Krunoslav Šebetić <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 07/23/2013 01:03 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
I like the idea of a veto but only if it's used for when a particular
language has had it's translations broken or corrupted in some way.
Obviously the example of "French" was a bit daft because the French
translation is always excellent. However, it's difficult to see a good
example of when a veto might be needed or might have been good. You always
seem to fix any problems. Perhaps having a formal veto option "written up"
as a rule might encourage the very problem it's trying to forestall?
Is it possible to just send an announce mail to the announcement list and
worn translator to check their translations and then pool fixed
translations from Pootle before official rc, so that all languages can get
valid (the bug free) release?
Usually when there are translation conflicts, Andras used to send a message.
If he didn´t do it, I suppose that all merge went fine, isn´t it?
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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