Re: Ensuring Quality in Ubuntu Translations
>>>>> "Clytie" == Clytie Siddall <clytie@riverland.net.au> writes:
Clytie> This consists, as in at least some teams here, of
Clytie> experienced translators assigned to review files and to
Clytie> approve files for upload. (No file is uploaded/committed
Clytie> which has not been reviewed and approved.)
Also, note that editing and review is a different skill. My project
has had good results (in the code rather than documentation and
translation area, but I think the analogy is strong) with asking
people to contribute ad hoc reviews. While it's not going to lessen
the workload for the experienced reviewers, it shifts the burden from
direct review to mentoring, and helps increase both trust and the pool
of skilled reviewers. Also, people who contribute reviews tend to
foster cooperation in other ways, while people who are loners anyway
rarely contribute reviews.
I applaud your institution of a review requirement; my own project has
been unable to do so for code, let alone documentation. It's not easy
to find reviewers and get the cooperation of the team in delaying
commits pending review.
--
Graduate School of Systems and Information Engineering University of Tsukuba
http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/ Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Economics of Information Communication and Computation Systems
Experimental Economics, Microeconomic Theory, Game Theory
Reply to: