Hi Andy and thanks for the clarifications.
I understand that this is an open-source project and that most (but luckily not all!) of the work that goes into UC is unpaid and made by volunteers. When possible I do raise bug reports, and if the bug is easy enough then I will also submit a patch.
My question with UC and where it's going is this: When the team fleshes out the roadmap and discuss where UC is headed, is i18n part of the core discussions and does it affect how you plan the UC architecture? We're already onto version 3.x and I have the feeling that i18n is still an afterthought.
And this is what makes it difficult for people of my level to propose patches and code. If the core of UC is not 'arhitected' correctly, then any proper fixes to correct i18n issues with UC really means a major piece of code rewrite. And few people are up to the challenge. However is i18n support were truly and properly integrated at the core of UC then submitting patches becomes much easier.
I love UC and don't mean to sound like I'm just a bag of i18n complaints. I didn't even know about i18n until I moved to Japan and had to start coding over here so I can imagine that for most developers it's an issue they don't even realize exists I mean, even Google doesn't get it right! (I can't tell you how many times Google decides to forget about my settings and show me it's main page in Japanese instead of English