converted to 1.6 markup
|Deletions are marked like this.||Additions are marked like this.|
|Line 42:||Line 42:|
|Colin Walters also wrote [[http://people.debian.org/~walters/descriptions.html|some guidelines]] which should be used as a reference by maintainers and reviewers.||
Colin Walters also wrote [[http://people.debian.org/~bubulle/smith/descriptions.html|some guidelines]] which should be used as a reference by maintainers and reviewers (as Colin resigned from the project, his account was removed and these guidelines are now hosted on ChristianPerrier home page).
The Smith Review Project
The purpose of the Smith Review Project (SRP) is to review all English texts associated with Debian packages, namely debconf templates, manual pages and packages descriptions.
The project is named Smith because every nice project must have a name and Smith is a commonly accepted "common name" for people in English-speaking parts of the world. It also opens possibilities to play on words with "blacksmith", "wordsmith" and the like. The project also has a three-letter acronym name (SRP) which is mandatory in Free Software projects.
The project will begin with the debconf templates review subproject which should last for the whole etch->lenny release cycle.
The main place for discussion about this project is the Debian English localisation mailing-list.
The debconf templates review subproject
In short, the aim of this process is to review the debconf templates for packages that use them, based on their popcon score, and:
- review the debconf templates
- update translations
- get new translations
This process will last for the whole etch-->lenny release cycle.
The packages description review subproject
In the beginning, package descriptions will be reviewed along with debconf templates. This subproject could continue later by reviewing package descriptions for the packages that don't have debconf templates.
Some work has already be done by Clément Stenac, see :
Colin Walters also wrote some guidelines which should be used as a reference by maintainers and reviewers (as Colin resigned from the project, his account was removed and these guidelines are now hosted on ChristianPerrier home page).
The manpages review subproject
The purpose of that project is to review manual pages for Debian native packages. Manual pages for packages that have an upstream are not in the scope of this subproject.
- Should we consider using wotomae or similar to track the work?