[Debian-l10n-devel] Translations cleanup

[Nicolas François]

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 03:36:39PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> On 06/10/2010 01:09 AM, Nicolas François wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 07:56:42PM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> >>Quoting Arne Goetje (arne.goetje at canonical.com):
> 
> >>>I just stumbled upon this translation overview page:
> >>>http://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po/
> >>>
> >>>The script which generates the page seems to need some improvement:
> >>>  * it seems not to use the iso_639_3.xml file from the iso-codes
> >>>package, since many language codes are marked as "Unknown language".
> >>
> >>
> >>I'm not sure this is easy to achieve. Nicolas, any idea?
> >
> >I think the scripts are using
> >http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/debian-l10n/dl10n/trunk/lib/Locale/
> >I'm sure it's possible to use the iso XML files instead, but I do not know
> >how to parse those files. Also, I will not have time to do this, but can
> >update the data at the end of the files of the above directory.
> 
> That would also work for the meantime.
> 
> >>>  * language codes with @ modifiers are not parsed correctly. The
> >>>script should split the string at the @ and display it like this:
> >>>ca at valencia Catalan (valencia).
> >
> >This would need more input.
> >I do not understand what "not parsed correctly" means here. Do you have
> >links on what are the consequences of this incorrect parsing. Then I would
> >be able to find which script could be improved.
> 
> The same link I have mentioned above
> (http://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po/). All language codes
> with @ modifiers are labelled as "Unknown language".

OK, this is generated by scripts on the website. IIRC, there are
similar perl modules, using a similar format for the list of languages.

I do not have an easy access to those scripts. The web site guys would
have to be contacted for this, or I can try to keep this in a corner of my
head for the next time I intend to make a change there.

> >Currently, the database contains lines like:
> >
> >po/ca at valencia.po!ca at valencia!205t0f0u!po/accerciser_1.10.1-1_ca at valencia.po!Carles Ferrando Garcia<carles.ferrando at gmail.com>!Catalan (Valenci&#224;)<tradgnome at softcatala.org>
> >
> >>>  * some entries look bogus, e.g. vi_AR. There are no translations
> >>>with that code, so it needs to be investigated where this code comes
> >>>from.
> >>
> >>Certainly from some bogus package providing a vi_AR.po file.
> >
> >People (other than me;) could hunt these issues, but I think this person
> >will loose a lot of energy when the wrong file is coming from upstream and
> >not from Debian.
> 
> We could remove them from the package by patching it.

If it is not a burden to the maintainer each time they package a new
upstream release, that could work.

> >>>Also, I'd like to ask if there is any coordinated effort planned or
> >>>underway to fix the .po file names in the packages themselves? Quite
> >>>a few files need to be renamed in order to be useable.
> >>
> >>There have been some initiatives. In a quite distant past, I reported
> >>a few such errors to the relevant packages.
> >
> >The only think I might be willing to do (i.e. does not cost too much from
> >my time, and might sometimes have a result) is to issue warning (those are
> >linked in the PTS page for source packages).
> 
> Would those warnings be noticed by anyone? And would they be acted upon?

Not me ;)

If you intend to chase those issues, then you can start with:
http://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po-debconf/errors-by-pkg

There is no such list for th po category onthe web site, but it should be
possible to generate it from the database:
http://i18n.debian.net/material/data/unstable.gz
(look for "Errors:")

Best Regards,
-- 
Nekral