Author terry.reedy
Recipients abarry, benjamin.peterson, docs@python, mdk, terry.reedy, vstinner
Date 2016-05-31.16:04:57
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
From what I know of regional and country variations in spanish, the main grammatical differences are in usages, such as the informal plural 2nd person, that need not appear in a techical manual.  I don't know about recently acquired technical terms.  From reading pyar for awhile, I also know that it has participants from all over latin america, so I suspect that their translation is not necessarily Argentina-specific.  Conclusion: we (pydev) should not worry until there is an actual conflict from competing translations.

The patch has this table:

+               # version, target, isdev
+               ('3.4', WWWROOT + "/3.4", False),
+               ('3.5', WWWROOT + "/3.5", False),
+               ('3.6', WWWROOT + "/3.6", True),
+               ('2.7', WWWROOT + "/2.7", False)

Why is 3.4 included, given that it now has the same status as 3.3?
Would it not be easier to default to False and only list 3.6?
Is it because you maintain separate branches for different 3.x branches?  Given the presence of Version Changed and Version Added paragraphs, that is almost unnecessary.  (Not having Version Deleted items is the main reason they might be.)

Is/are the main author/maintainer(s) of already nosy on the issue, to review?  I cannot even though at least mildly interested.
(The disconnect between interest and technical expertise is part of the problem with translation issues.)

There is no Rietveld review link for the patch.  I do not know if it is the form of the patch or the target file.  Viktor, do you?  If not, someone on the core-mentorship list would.
Date User Action Args
2016-05-31 16:04:58terry.reedysetrecipients: + terry.reedy, vstinner, benjamin.peterson, docs@python, abarry, mdk
2016-05-31 16:04:58terry.reedysetmessageid: <>
2016-05-31 16:04:58terry.reedylinkissue26546 messages
2016-05-31 16:04:57terry.reedycreate