User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

A report from OSCON 2007

A report from OSCON 2007

Posted Aug 9, 2007 8:34 UTC (Thu) by nhippi (subscriber, #34640)
In reply to: A report from OSCON 2007 by jbailey
Parent article: A report from OSCON 2007

> In Ubuntu we don't use the locales from the upstream glibc tree on the grounds that they're quite frequently wrong and (justifiably) hard to get updated. Since we already have communities of folks through Launchpad who are doing the translations for the software, we trust them to tell us the locale-specific needs that they have.

This sounds a lot like you are saying you are trading "high quality and working with upstream" with "whatever we get from users without verifying".

Or maybe let me put it the other way:

If the upstream really is "frequently wrong", despite of being "(justifiably) hard to get updated", how come this "(justification)" does not apply to updates via launchpad? What magic makes launchpad updates so much more high quality that it's worth to fork locales?

> There are a few ways that we could fix this better

Please do. Ubuntu is getting a reputation of doing quick hacks to hide the problem instead of actually fixing the issue.

re: bitten by:

(Log in to post comments)

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds