Re: DPL teams survey summary summary (about i18n team)
A Tuesday 01 July 2008 05:46:43, Christian Perrier escreveu:
> Quoting Miguel Figueiredo (email@example.com):
> > Can you point out what kind of structure would benefit the Debian
> > i18n/l10n effort?
> > The following comes to my mind:
> > - formal team (role(s) ?)
> Something I wanted to discuss, yes. At this moment, there are de facto
> team "leaders" for l10n teams who are active. You( Miguel) are that
> person for the Portuguese (non Brazilian) team, for instance.
> Would it be interesting to make this more formal ?
It could be interesting by functional tasks:
- perhaps others you (and others) can identify with a different overview
- for countrys only together with guidelines, and mainly for languages with
several contributors. To me it's not important to be a 'de facto' something,
workflow definition it's important. i hate receiving translations with
incomplete headers, not in utf-8, that msgfmt reports problems (i send some
to you like that 'in the old days', remember?
> > - goals (short/long term)
> That as well. For the moment, goals are imprecise (except "thou shalt
> be 100% everywhere") and we don't have priorities: each team sets its
> own priority.
Goals could be different than 100%. I think that 100% it's only a long term
goal, it's not enough.
I'm thinking about standardization, reviewed translations, mainly quality.
- debian packages
> > - infrastructure
> The "team" here exists: firstname.lastname@example.org. It
> is a consequence of the 2006 and 2007 Extremadura meetings. However,
> the work there is somewhat jerky (and probably often "hidden" as
> results might be not obvious while they are here (robots, collecting
> the material, etc.).
- Compendiums available _and_ used
- Repos for translations with commit access to several people? (files.po used
in package buildind - i don't know if this is possible...)
- Bug reports regarding translations?
- Pootle (or pootle-like) system with workflow
- bad variables in translations as in d-i translations
- dictionaries as in the d-i/manual translations
- manpages in po format
- link to upstream
Is it enough? Do you have anything else in mind that could benefit in the long
run? I bet you have :)
> > - policys (most important?)
What should a Debian packager know about the i18n/l10n effort?
Copyright of translations explained to everyone.
- translations and upstream packages
> > - guidelines
> We're desperately missing more established guidelines, both for
> mainainers and translators, certainly. This is one of the things I'm
> personnally not good at, I'm afraid.
This I have to strongly deny - You took part of this:
http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/doc/i18n/ - remember? ;-)
You can't fool us :)))
Guidelines - as I know you know better than me :) - could avoid duplicate work
and bad moods ('hostile takeovers', controvertial translations, ...).
Directions for begginers surely lead to more contributions (as long as Debian
stay with a good userbase as today surely it has).
Some few things written and available could be helpfull. Maybe several are
still done and a common practice but is it visible to everybody? Just think
how many 'furious-bubulle posts' you can avoid :)
Of course all this takes time and manpower, but it's possible to improve.