> Roberto Mello writes:
>
> > 1) Can we contribute these docs to the PostgreSQL project?
>
> In general, yes. However, until there is an evident and sustained effort
> to keep these up to date, I'm not sure if we should keep them in the main
> source tree.
>
> > 2) What flags do we need to add to the docbook sources? (so that
> > "make pt-BR" could be done, for example)
>
> As far as DocBook sources, you put a lang="pt_br" attribute in the
> top-level element. As far as Makefiles, there are a couple of
> possibilities, depending on what becomes of 1).
>
> > 3) Under what license(s) should/must the translation be put?
>
> The current license?
>
> Btw., are you sure what you are getting into? A complete translation of
> the PG documentation is going to take an insane amount of time. You might
> also be interested in doing some translation work on program messages.
> See <http://www.postgresql.org/~petere/nls.php>.
>
Using cvs diff and patching little by little periodically would save many time
(althought still lots of work to do). I wish the documentation of different language
could be maintained somewhere using cvs, thus we could encourage users of
different languages to use it and make it better, in fact, I've done four version of it,
from 6.5, 7.0, 7.1 to 7.2, and it seems those docs did very well in pushing the usage
of PostgreSQL in China.
And I wish the program messages could stable sometime later,
especially those for backend, sometimes I'm doing `make update-po',
there many message merged in and create too many `fuzzy' ones, and it
would take lots of time to fix that. I can understand that, because there are
many message still need to be done in source code, so I thing it's better
for 7.3 loop to finished the whole NLS support.
regards laser
