[packagekit] Translations: Ambiguous, unclear and other dodgy messages

[Nils Philippsen]

On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 10:52 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > [...]
> > > #. TRANSLATORS: We did not remove any packages
> > > #: ../client/pk-console.c:748
> > > msgid "The package removal was cancelled!"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > Spellchecker flagged this for me:
> > 
> > (2) Probably en_GB (or en_AU ;-) instead of en_US -- this will likely
> > not be "translated" (serves 'em right ;-P).
> 
> Fixed, although I AM an en_GB :-)

Leaving it en_GB would be fine with me. But at least there are people
caring about en_GB "translations", for en_US I don't think so (not if
the source language is another variant of English).

> > > #. TRANSLATORS: This a request for a EULA
> > 
> > Yeah right, but...
> > 
> > > #: ../client/pk-console.c:1175
> > > msgid "Eula required"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > ... what does that mean to the user? Just curious ;-).
> 
> The user has to accept the EULA text before the install will continue.

"You need to accept its license to install the package."?

> > > #: ../client/pk-console.c:1601
> > > msgid "You need to specify a time term"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > Is that the same as "time frame"?
> 
> Nahh, it's a bloody awful error message.
> 
> "You need to specify an action, e.g. 'update-system'"

Oh, "time term" <-> "verb", now I get it.

> > [...]
> > > #: ../policy/org.freedesktop.packagekit.policy.in.h:1
> > > msgid "Accept EULA"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > I assume this is about a PolicyKit action/authorization: "Accepting a
> > EULA for package installation"?
> 
> It's granting permission so the user can accept the EULA. It's just the
> title.
> 
> > (3) I think for actions/authorizations the gerund form(?) would suit
> > better than an infinitive.
> 
> Woo, I fail at English.

Well, if it's the window/dialog title it's me who's doin' the failin'.

> > [...]
> > > #: ../policy/org.freedesktop.packagekit.policy.in.h:13
> > > msgid "Install local file"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > (3), "... package file"?
> 
> Package file doesn't "ring" right IMO -- got any other suggestions?

Other than plain "file"? Not really.

> > > #: ../policy/org.freedesktop.packagekit.policy.in.h:14
> > > msgid "Install untrusted local file"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > (3), "untrusted" meaning "unsigned"? "Installing unsigned local package
> > file"?
> 
> No, untrusted, meaning untrusted :-)

I get it: pkg signature not imported (yet).

> > > #: ../src/pk-main.c:87
> > > msgid "The correct user is not launching the executable (usually
> > > root)"
> > > msgstr ""
> > 
> > "An unauthorized user launched the program (usually this should be done
> > by the 'root' user)"?
> 
> It's not the fact they are unauthorized, it's just it's the wrong user.
> Users should never see this message -- it's a developer thing.

Ah. "This program should be run as the root user"? Don't mind if it's
only seen by developers, but the negation plus present progressive makes
my head spin (I have some fears about how the original sentence may be
translated to German ;-).

> If you're feeling generous, I've attached the newest pot file again.

I've skimmed through it and found a stray en_GB "licence" in it, but it
looks well now.

Nils
-- 
Nils Philippsen      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase 
Red Hat               a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
nils at redhat.com       nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint:      C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011