plan for working with release notes
Paul W. Frields
stickster at gmail.com
Thu Oct 23 01:22:02 UTC 2008
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 14:30 -0700, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 16:53 -0400, Jared Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 13:41 -0700, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
> > > Does this sound like something we can ask the translators to do?
> > >
> > > 1. Docs team creates all the needed files in
> > > fedora-doc-utils/common/ for each language currently in
> > > release-notes/po/.
> > >
> > > 2. Translators clone f-d-u to be 'docs-common' locally, next to
> > > the release-notes module:
> > >
> > > git clone git://fedorahosted.org/git/docs/release-notes
> > > git clone git://fedorahosted.org/git/fedora-doc-utils
> > > docs-common
> >
> > I thought one of the fundamental points was that we weren't going to
> > force the translators to learn yet another SCM system. We should offer
> > alternatives (open a ticket with the info and one of us will do it for
> > them) for the steps that would otherwise require tools like git.
>
> Yes, that is a fundamental goal, and currently they don't need to use
> *any* SCM to submit translations. Translators can download the POT file
> and submit the PO file via l10n.fedoraproject.org. But for those who
> want to build locally to check their work, they need a working
> toolchain.
>
> This is worth clarifying in updates to TQSG -- these are actions for
> people who want to build locally.
>
> I think a default action for someone who is stuck in any way is to open
> a Trac ticket.
And there's no doubt, with email triggering to the f-docs-l, that people
will see and address problems quickly that way.
> > > 3. If their language is not there, they create the PO file and
> > > the common files in ./docs-common/common by running
> > > './docs-common/common $LANG'.
> > >
> > > 4. Translators submit PO file changes via Transifex.
> > >
> > > 5. Translators update the LINGUA file via Transifex.
> >
> > Since this is a rare occurance (at least, I think it is)... we should
> > point out that we'd be willing to create the common files for them if
> > they don't want to install git.
>
> Since creating the actual files in the repository requires commit
> access, we might just want to simplify. Thus step 3 becomes:
>
> 3. If their language is not there, they can open a Trac ticket
> to get it included. In the meantime, if they are feeling up to
> it, they can do this, substituting their language code for
> $LANG:
>
> cd docs-common/common
> ./new-legal-files.sh $LANG
>
> > > 6. Translators submit any translations for the f-d-u/common/
> > > files via a new ticket in
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/release-notes.
> > >
> > > 7. Relnotes team submits the translated common files to git
> > > manually.
> >
> > Everything else above looks good to me.
> >
> > > My questions now are:
> > >
> > > * For the files in f-d-u/common, what -$LANG format should we be using?
> > > For example, there is a po/de.po file, and a common/*-de_DE.xml.
> >
> > No clue... all I know is that some languages fall back... so for
> > example, a en_US might fall back to en.
>
> Interesting. It appears that there is a parity right now between the
> po/ folder and the common/ folder, especially since I merged the Korean
> files.
I believe most translators are using something like "xx" and not "xx_YY"
but there are specific exceptions, like zh_CN and zh_TW, and pt and
pt_BR.
> > > * I added *ko.xml to f-d-u/common/. How do I know if there are any
> > > others missing? Is it OK to expect translators to create those locally,
> > > which makes their build work, and submit them to Docs?
> >
> > I don't know. FYI, the Korean language stuff was done just last night.
> > It's probably worth documenting what needs to be done to create a new
> > language, so that people like myself who are inexperience with the
> > translation process have a canonical source to know what to do.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Adding_languages_to_fedora-doc-utils
>
> Not much for now, but keep on adding there. :)
OK, here's the one place where I have to dissent. We should simply fix
the TQSG and republish it post-haste, not duplicate content (or worse,
create confusion as to where the right answer lies.)
> Notice I added it to a new category that we can populate with more
> pages:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Documentation_tools
Possibly aside from the objection above, this is totally cool!
--
Paul W. Frields
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://paul.frields.org/ - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20081022/ce8cb03c/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-docs-list
mailing list