Re: [RFC] translation back-ports

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz> wrote:
> It's time I think to start making the older branches of Squid more
> compatible with the langpack translations.
>
> The plan is to immediately:
>
> - merge back the templates directory contents as if it was a new language.
> - make those templates the default hard-coded language files instead of
> English/* .
>
>
> Two further steps needing discussion:
>
> - removing the old translations bundled with those branches. quite outdated
> now.

If they can be replaced with the langpack-derived versions, I can see
no reason why not.

> - best way to bundle the langpack with old branch releases. making squid
> code a single download bundle again while keeping the langpack updates a
> separate download built from 3-HEAD. Is it even worth it?

I'd just incorporate that as part of the release process.

> - is it worth cross-porting the auto-negotiate feature to 2.7/2.8?

IMO no.

> It's definately not worth back-porting the translation toolkit pieces and
> .PO.

I agree.

-- 
 /kinkie