Re: Source L10n for extensions (ChatZilla, venkman and others)

Robert Kaiser wrote:
> Robert Kaiser wrote:
>> So, to me, it seems that the way to go for those extensions is 
>> something Axel called "dependent langpacks" - which is more or less 
>> what ChatZilla already uses, but with extension dependency added into 
>> it (which is ignored on older applications, so ChatZilla langpacks can 
>> easily add them and still be compatible with older apps).
>> What this means is that the original extension packages will probably 
>> all include the en-US locale as previously, and additionally we'll 
>> have every existing additional language as a separate extension (both 
>> in SeaMonkey and as XPIs).
> 
> As it looks to me that there is basic agreement on this as the technical 
> solution, I filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397246 to 
> work on this for ChatZilla.
> I already have some work in progress lying around on my disk for the 
> SeaMonkey repackaging case, but I consider this quite experimental for 
> the moment (and of course this depends on ChatZilla being packaged as an 
> extension within SeaMonkey, which is a different bug).
> 
> This does not mean that this is set in stone - I can't decide that - but 
> it's the way I'd like to go for SeaMonkey. I consider what I'm doing 
> with this now some kind of experiment on how this can work, and there 
> are still some things I need to figure out.
> I think we can arrive at a good solution with this though.

Did anyone actually test that this scheme works? Like, other than in 
theory? In all releases/branches/apps that are wanted? This is really 
only a build problem at the very end.

I haven't seen a real commitment from the chatzilla devs on this scheme, 
either, so I'm unclear on who's owning chatzilla l10n.

Axel