[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n-doc
Subject:    Re: String freeze exemption request for Solid (solid-qt.po)
From:       Māris Nartišs <maris.kde () gmail ! com>
Date:       2009-12-10 16:25:58
Message-ID: 9a4fa4b70912100825w423e77a7l88b8ac325840d101 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

OK from Latvian team.

You got no objections and two OK's - feel free to commit.

Maris.

2009/12/10 Jacopo De Simoi <wilderkde@gmail.com>:
> Dear l10n maintainers
> 
> I am unaware of what is the policy for exemptions, but I didn't receive neither an \
> approval or a disapproval; since additional delay is bad (and this has been out for \
> almost a week) I'd like to know if/when I can or cannot commit the changes. Thanks \
> again. 
> --J
> 
> 
> On Friday 4 December 2009 23:19:02 Jacopo De Simoi wrote:
> > Dear l10n heroes,
> > I'd like to add a few words in case the problem with the present string is not \
> > clear (in fact it was not clear to me a few hours ago :P ) An "Encrypted \
> > Container" is /not/ an "encrypted partition" which you can mount by providing a \
> > pwd; it is rather an "encrypted device"; giving the password will make other \
> > partitions (maybe more than one) appear. In other words it looks more like a \
> > /dev/sda than /dev/sdaX. 
> > Using "removable media" (as it is now) is unfortunately very misleading and it \
> > would be really great if we could fix this before 4.4. Thanks again.
> > 
> > Jacopo
> > 
> > On Friday 4 December 2009 21:40:06 you wrote:
> > > Dear l10n heroes, hardware-developers
> > > Here is a patch that allows to better describe encrypted partitions as such; \
> > > right now the behaviour is quite confusing as the same string as for a regular \
> > > media is shown... 
> > > The patch unfortunately adds one (and a half) string:
> > > 
> > > description = QObject::tr("%1 Encrypted Container", "%1 is the \
> > > size").arg(size_str); description = QObject::tr("Encrypted \
> > > Container").arg(size_str); 
> > > An (*ALMOST*) newstring-free solution could be to add the (not translated) \
> > > filesystem type (such as crypto_LUKS), however this could be even worse than \
> > > the previous solution (ordering fstype and size might be rather non-obvious) 
> > > Please let me know if such an exemption could be granted, if my alternative \
> > > could be more acceptable or both are a no-go. (also don't forget to CC me!)
> > > Thanks a lot!
> > > 
> > > Jacopo
> > > 
> > 
> 


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]