From Fedora Project Wiki

< I18N‎ | Meetings

2009-07-07 0500 UTC on #fedora-meeting at Freenode (MeetBot)


Previous meeting I18N/Meetings/2009-06-23

Next meeting I18N/Meetings/2009-07-21



05:01:03 <juhp> #startmeeting

05:01:47 <tagoh3> hi
05:01:52 <juhp> #meetingtopic Fedora i18n Meeting
05:02:03 <juhp> hi tagoh3
05:02:37 <juhp> #topic attendees

05:03:03 <dingyichen> Hi juhp.
05:03:08 <phuang> hi
05:04:01 <pravins> hi
05:04:12 <paragn> hi
05:05:38 <juhp> ok

05:06:13 <juhp> #topic
05:07:00 <jni_> hi
05:07:01 <juhp> not too much agenda today
05:07:11 <juhp> hi jni_ and asgeirf

05:07:29 <jni_> hi juhp
05:07:52 <asgeirf> hi :)
05:08:24 <Kaio_Sashimi> hi
05:08:36 <juhp> cool
05:09:52 <juhp> #topic

05:10:05 <juhp> well not too much to update on the yum plugin
05:10:32 <juhp> unfortunately been rather busy with other stuff but finally submitted it to feature-wrangler now...
05:11:03 <juhp> and hope to find some time this week to create the meta packages and hack a little on the python plugin
05:11:35 <juhp> then that moves along will submit the package and plugin for review...
05:12:05 <juhp> for the record there has been some discussion on it last week on anaconda-devel list

05:12:25 <juhp> let me see if I can pull out an url first :)
05:12:30 <dingyichen> juhp: what's the relationship between the yum-plugin-langpack and <language>-support?
05:13:07 <juhp>

05:13:59 <juhp> dingyichen: the yum groups you mean?
05:14:10 <dingyichen> juhp: yes
05:14:21 <juhp> dingyichen: well for a start that is where the metapackages would/will live

05:14:41 <juhp> but the plugin may not use yum groups
05:14:53 <juhp> though that is also an alternative for now
05:15:18 <juhp> dingyichen: if you want to make the question more specific? :)
05:15:53 <juhp> dingyichen: I haven't played with the python code in a while so need to revisit that soon

05:17:34 <juhp> ok let's move on then
05:17:42 <juhp> #topic IPA fonts
05:17:44 <dingyichen> juhp: whether is the language preference being  installed?

05:17:47 <dingyichen> Sure.
05:18:01 <juhp> dingyichen: language preference?
05:18:29 <dingyichen> On the time when user install the language support?
05:18:39 <juhp> dingyichen: so to clarify maybe - if you install lang X you will get langpack-support-X installed

05:18:56 <juhp> as in as at install time
05:19:15 <juhp> does it answer?
05:19:46 <juhp> I already talked a bit to tagoh3 about the ipa fonts change in f12
05:20:08 <juhp> and I think the fonts are nice...
05:20:48 <juhp> the only issue that comes up is still the interesting difference between gothic and pgothic (and similarly for mincho probably)

05:21:00 <tagoh3> juhp: sure - though we didn't have any conclusions about the font size issue?
05:21:05 <juhp> right
05:21:08 <juhp> that too
05:22:01 <juhp> so currently (in Live etc) pgothic is default I think

05:22:06 <juhp> tagoh3: any more thoughts on that?
05:23:13 <tagoh3> juhp: well, for UI font, proportional should looks better than fixed size generally.
05:23:41 <juhp> right
05:24:09 <tagoh3> so need to scale up a bit to keep similar look?

05:24:35 <juhp> maybe yeah - so scale up both fonts?
05:24:43 <juhp> or all even
05:24:50 <tagoh3> if necessary
05:25:10 <juhp> not sure though how it will affect the spacing around the glyphs?
05:25:11 <tagoh3> need more testing I suppose

05:25:15 <juhp> ok
05:25:18 <tagoh3> right
05:26:25 <juhp> ok - just thought I would bring it up here too for the attention of more people
05:27:04 <juhp> #topic bugs corner

05:27:14 <juhp> ok not actually on the agenda...
05:27:32 <juhp> I noticed today there are quite a lot of bugs in NEW
05:27:49 <juhp>

05:28:02 <juhp> might be better if we had UNVERIFIED or something but anyway
05:28:26 <juhp> 89 currently after I moved the red ones to assigned ;)
05:29:16 <juhp> a lot of them aren't our bugs of course but good to move our own bugs to assigned after accepting them
05:31:52 <juhp> ok hm I seen to have a lot of ibus-anthy bugs on that list ;)

05:32:09 <tagoh3> :)
05:32:16 <juhp> anyone have any bugs they want to discuss? :)
05:32:21 <juhp> tagoh3: thanks
05:32:44 <dingyichen> Hmm, so in that case, yum-plugin-language should be either installed with group-language support, or before that. Otherwise nothing being recorded.

05:33:03 <dingyichen> About lang-pack. :-)
05:33:37 <juhp> dingyichen: well the metapackages will require the plugin
05:34:09 <juhp> maybe better to explain by example
05:34:29 <dingyichen> juhp: Thanks, another 2 quick questions:

05:34:46 <dingyichen> 1. Need rpms be changed?
05:34:46 <juhp> User does a chinese install of fedora: will get langpack-support-zh/chinese installed
05:35:08 <juhp> dingyichen: now at this stage - or no such plans currently
05:36:14 <juhp> wondering about the naming if it is better to use locale like naming

05:36:23 <juhp> s/now/not/
05:36:24 <dingyichen> 2. Any naming guideline?
05:36:39 <tagoh3> juhp: what about %_install_langs as brought up on the list?
05:37:17 <juhp> dingyichen: I mentioned it in the feature briefly - I don't think we may enforce it for f12 - perhaps <package>-langpack-<lang>

05:37:31 <juhp> tagoh3: what about it? :)
05:38:00 <juhp> I think it is a bad idea
05:38:11 <tagoh3> aha
05:38:34 <juhp> but yeah in the longer term tighter rpm integration would be better

05:38:35 <tagoh3> not sure what exactly it's supposed to do
05:39:05 <juhp> tagoh3: well it allows one to restriction the installed translation langs
05:39:10 <juhp> %lang
05:39:21 <tagoh3> but if preparing any facilities to package the lang specific things to the separate package automatically, it would be nice

05:39:28 <juhp> so would make sense for firefox ;o)
05:39:57 <juhp> I am wishing that firefox might agree to langpacks if this feature works well
05:40:08 <juhp> fedora firefox I think
05:40:17 <tagoh3> depending on the maintainer to get it working properly would messes up the feature
05:40:40 <juhp> %lang?

05:40:59 <tagoh3> or need to pay attentions and more works to be done.
05:41:17 <tagoh3> juhp: or whatever
05:41:22 <juhp> tagoh3: right in the long run having rpm able to auto-subpackage langs would be good
05:42:04 <juhp> there was some talk about this in debian quite a while back - but I haven't followed their progress

05:42:07 <juhp> anyone know?
05:42:24 <juhp> I think they were calling them .tdeb's iirc
05:42:45 <juhp> anyway it is non-trivial out of f12 scope I would say
05:43:23 <juhp>

05:45:01 <juhp> anything else?
05:45:17 <juhp> #topic open
05:46:48 <juhp> otherwise we'll close the meeting shortly :)
05:47:53 <juhp> thanks for the meeting everyone!

05:48:15 <juhp> #endmeeting