And why was this on arch-dev and not the public list? Forwarding it there.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dan McGee
i'm against offering any localization from the devs. it's a big amount of packages we don't know how important they are or better how often they are used*.
arch is developed and documented primarly in english and so we should concentrate to offer a good en_US.utf8 base. nothing more from the core.
i suggest to lay i18n packages back into the community's hand. those packages are often easy to maintain but a hell of work for the rebuilders.
Andy
*we should improve archstat to show summarized output for the amount of one pkgname. that could help a lot for our wanted repo cleanup.
Quick thoughts on this, and not sure of the full implementation but it seems like a good idea in my head. Why don't we have an [i18n] repo, just as community and extra are repos? This should be administered under a separate set of permissions, so those that update these packages are not necessarily either TUs or Devs, but other users that have taken on the responsibility of maintaining localization packages. Key to this is some kind of permissions based thing- perhaps a certain user should only be able to modify FR localization packages, for instance. The system should support that, and it seems like pre-commit hooks in nearly all VCS systems should be able to enforce these permissions on a package or repo-level basis. This is another topic though. -Dan