[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Annoucement: New translation status page is installed


you're kidding, right?

Then what? Well, then we can talk to this person, and if s/he unwilling
to use the "right" terminology, then we can think of disabling her/his
account. Btw, I do translate 'Forward' with "Next" if 'Next' is meant,
and not with "Forward", consistent or not! IMO, it's just plain wrong!
;) Just kidding. :)

Not sure this is consistent with the rest. How do you define the 'right' terminology if there's no precise framework ? Why should someone be prevented from translation if his translations are correct yet using another terminology ?

Wasn't your voice one of the loudest raising the issue of consistency? Since I believe that the comments made concerning consistency are very valid, I am suggesting solutions on how some of the problems can be handled with the given system. If you don't think someone should be prevented from doing translations that are correct, but inconsistent with everything else, what exactly were you on about previously?

Noted. A maintainer is, as opposed to the translator, a permanent (well,
in theory) entity. The maintainer can commit at any time and release the
assignment of a translator at any time, hence, keep someone from
comitting. A maintainer is a person who is willing to take
responsibility for the quality and consistency of a module, a group of
modules or for an entire language. And while it is a good thing to have
a maintainer, it is not a requirement. I know you think it should be,
but that's exactly where we disagree. I believe a translation community
can function well, even without having a designated maintainer, and
that's what the system really is made for, to better manage the efforts
of self-maintained translators.

Yes. A translation community can indeed function very well without having an established team and/or maintainer and this is proven everyday. However, when there are teams in place, they need to be considered.

Yes, and I believe they are. If a coordinator of an active community (as in the group of people having the common interest of wanting to translate Fedora into their language, including "newer" translators) who has the support of most of the members of that language group requests to be a maintainer, this request is not denied.

A question: this new system has been installed after a request from the community, right ? How come many (if not all ?) people on this list are surprised ? ;) I don't remember a post on this list introducing the new system nor someone posting to request it ? Or are you referring to another 'community' ?

Some URLs would help. Sorry if I missed something.

Please, don't you think you're going a little off track here? Is that your idea of constructive criticism, or are you simply on some kind of mission now? Why do you ask me? Why don't you ask the people suggesting to lock files to disallow two translators from comitting at the same time, since that's the main thing that's new. And I still believe their reasoning to be very valid.



- -- Youcef R. Rahal
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)


Fedora-trans-list mailing list
Fedora-trans-list redhat com

Dr. Bernd R. Groh                       Phone : +61 7 3514 8114
Software Engineer (Localization)        Fax   : +61 7 3514 8199
Red Hat Asia-Pacific                    Mobile: +61 403 851 269
Disclaimer: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer/

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]