Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:56:39 -0400 From: Thomas Abthorpe <tabthorpe@FreeBSD.org> To: Mark Foster <mark@foster.cc>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] New category proposal, i18n Message-ID: <3f6a88120906251456p439dcbfdt89cb1e2876b04b1f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4A43827F.1020700@foster.cc> References: <200906181114.43935.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> <200906231506.05001.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> <20090623203608.GB15815@comcast.net> <200906240956.10625.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> <4a4312cd.yWDVqdLjAXRTY5Bn%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4A43827F.1020700@foster.cc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Friday will be one week for the topic, at which point I will take on the next leg of the battle, which is making the pitch to portmgr. Thomas On 25/06/2009, Mark Foster <mark@foster.cc> wrote: > perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: >>>> If i18n is too cryptic or too alphanumeric, and >>>> internationalization is too long, why not go with "nls"? >>>> >>> I personally think that nls is equally as cryptic as i18n or l10n. >>> >> >> Anyone care for "intlzn"? It's short, should still tab-complete >> from "in", and it may be a bit less cryptic than nls, i18n, or l10n. >> > If I may be so bold as to present a democratic outcome. > To help settle the matter please vote on this issue within 48 hours. > <http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpview/615850-178803>; > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Sent from my mobile device Thomas Abthorpe, FreeBSD Ports Committer tabthorpe@FreeBSD.org, http://people.freebsd.org/~tabthorpe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3f6a88120906251456p439dcbfdt89cb1e2876b04b1f>