Transifex in website category
sgallagh at redhat.com
Wed Mar 10 13:07:11 UTC 2010
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 03/10/2010 08:02 AM, Piotr Drąg wrote:
> W dniu 10.03.2010 00:02, Dimitris Glezos pisze:
>> I'd like to know what our Uber Tx Maintainer, Piotr thinks. He's the
>> guy who makes these kind of things happen. =)
> If there are only pluses, there is nothing we can do really. ;) So
> projects concerned here are these:
> FreeIPA and SSSD are different from the rest, because they are hosted on
> fedorahosted.org and I believe they use tx.net only for the e-mail
> submission feature. Should we count them as 'upstream' projects, or they
> are willing to switch to t.fp.o after upgrade to 0.7? I'm CC'ing their
> maintainers, I hope they can clear this out.
The SSSD is using transifex.net because it supports the email submission
feature, and t.fp.o did not back when we were setting it up.
If you feel that it would get more attention on t.fp.o, then I'm all for it.
> Another different set of packages are iBus and imsettings, which I guess
> should be moved to tx.net already. It is of course up to their maintainers.
> For now, I'm going to create "Various upstream resources" (anyone with
> better naming for it and for current Various?) and move non-fedorahosted
> projects here.
Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the trans