Description of problem:
man-pages-fr-2.80.0-2.fc10.noarch has file conflict with sitecopy-0.16.5-1.fc10.i386
I am sitecopy maintainer. What would be best in your view: to remove file from sitecopy or man-pages-fr ?
Of course, the better place for the translation of a man page is in the upstream tarball.
And translators will be happy if upstream say "Hey translators! $PACKAGE man page(s) have been updated, could you please update your translation?"
And of course, upstream have to let time enough to translators...
At least 48H, a week is a good time.
I'm the french man-pages maintainer (http://manpagesfr.free.fr), I also maintain some other french man-pages.
Could you please give me an URL for your last tarball?
I want to be sure the french man page you provide is the last translation.
As a sample, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455277, french man page provided by rpm is older than the one provided by man-pages-fr, which is 6 years old.......
I agree with you completely, But I think as you already own this file in package please keep it (and update if necessary) and I will remove file from sitecopy.
Thanks for quick response.
http://www.manyfish.co.uk/sitecopy/sitecopy-0.16.6.tar.gz is latest tarball.
It is the latest source. May you verify which one is whether man-pages-fr has latest man page or not.
What say? If you confirm we close this bug then?
Sorry, I seem to have messed it up. Please remove file from your package so that rawhide conflict is solved ASAP. I agree with you that file should be in tarball itself.
Created attachment 313388 [details]
patch for french man page translation
(In reply to comment #3)
> I agree with you completely, But I think as you already own this file in
> package please keep it (and update if necessary) and I will remove file from
No! I don't agree!
As I said, the good place for a man page translation is the upstream package!
> Thanks for quick response.
> http://www.manyfish.co.uk/sitecopy/sitecopy-0.16.6.tar.gz is latest tarball.
> It is the latest source. May you verify which one is whether man-pages-fr has
> latest man page or not.
I just checked the two pages, differences are poor but the diff is big ;-)
Big because there are some uneeded trailing space and white lines in the french man pages you hold.
The only real differences are at lines 7 and 493-495 of the diff file.
You should apply in the english man pages the changes I made in the SEE ALSO section (lines 493-495 in the diff)
> What say? If you confirm we close this bug then?
I (or my subsitute) will close this bug as this is a man-pages-fr bug, not a sitecopy bug.
(In reply to comment #4)
> Sorry, I seem to have messed it up. Please remove file from your package so
> that rawhide conflict is solved ASAP. I agree with you that file should be in
> tarball itself.
> Please confirm?
sitecopy man page will be removed from man-pages-fr.
By me or my subsitute, but no ASAP ;-)
This isn't easy to find a subsitute to Zidane :-D
Please take your time. I feel I was drunk when I responded initially :-D
Thanks ;-) for patch, I will send upstream, changes required for English man page.
I will send English and fr man pages as suggested by you upstream. :-)
man-pages-fr-2.80.0-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9.
man-pages-fr-2.80.0-5.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8.
man-pages-fr-2.80.0-5.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
man-pages-fr-2.80.0-5.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.