In that case we should slip the release date, because now it sounds the bug fix much more important than the localization. But the truth is both of them needed for a good distribution. When we steal the time from localization for bug fix we lose the quality on the other side. Why we don't change the release date in that case?
First of all, my proposals were for a future release (11.0), just to be out of ambiguity. Slipping release date is not necessary I think. It's just a question of dedicating some time to the translation before the final release for what is changing continuously and to proofread so that we can plan our work. Otherwise, it's just a loss of time for translators, especially if they're not professionals, and the results is a bad translation.
Probably a dedicated (one week?) translation period close to the RC1 or final release would improve things, but I think it would be interesting to read other translators' opinion.
RC1 is too late--if you'd miss that date, there would not be a second chance. The last beta is actually already rather late, because there are several hops involved until translations are on the installation media.
We have to change that. Or Alpha builds should be for bug fixes and Beta for localization and other test.
I don't understand these rigid constraints for translators and not for developers myself. Why is RC too late? We are discussing about changing parts, which should be a very limited subset of the .po files. So as release notes are updated when needed, the community repositories are "dynamic" (why not decide which ones to include once for all is not clear, again), why is it so difficult to eventually update other's translations? We are asked for flexibility, so the same is expected on Novell side. With kind regards, Alberto --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-translation+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-translation+help@opensuse.org