Comment 2 for bug 1797860

I think we should answer some questions first in term of fundamentals.

1.
For instance, if I install fr_FR, I don't expect to have fr_CA installed (and it's not the case here), nor fr.
Why would that be different for English? I thinks en_US should only install en_US + the common (shared) packages. However, that doesn't count as "en" being installed, and doesn't pull en_GB for instance.

^ this is the first inconsistency we should fix IMHO.

1.5 -> fr shouldn't be installed, that's just a bug from what you told in the perl script.

2.
I don't understand why we install en_US when selecting !en. If a translation is missing, it will fallback to C, which is the program string, which is most of the time in english. Or, if we really want a fallback, shouldn't that be "en" (always installed then), which doesn't pull any en_*?

3.
Keep in sync the list with the seeds + installer.

I don't know if there will be or not a new desktop installer yet (that will be soon decide), but it's something to take into account. At least, we can try solving those first two and get a good use/case direction, what do you think? (there is certainly some points I'm missing by not being an expert though, I'm aware of this and happily will listen to your knowledge there ;))