Re: Request for resolving situation(kn_IN)
On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 17:31 +0530, Vikram Vincent wrote:
> On 13/03/2008, Pramod R <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> --- Vikram Vincent <email@example.com> wrote:
> I don't understand how this is so complicated. For
> one, I do welcome your efforts in getting the
> translations done, (although I have not seen the same
> committed), I would be happy to commit it. And if you
> think, you want to commit on your own, I would not
> mind if you apply for a SVN account and let me know. I
> frankly don't see why you need a Co-ordinatorship for this.
> -> To prevent duplication of effort. This is imperative considering
> that Shankar and yourself are doing work offline and committing at
> not-defined intervals. And we are doing work online and trying to
> reduce the entry barrier.
> As coordinator, how do you propose to coordinate in this
> situation(whether GNOME or OPenOffice or Aspell or anything else)?
As Pramod said, you can get SVN commit access and commit directly.
That's pretty much all there is to it. The coordinator has not magic
powers or anything.
I understand that people are tempted to claim coordinator status when
they become the most active contributor, but the logic behind that claim
does not necessarily hold. A coordinator is not even supposed to be the
most active translator at all. [S]He's a "coordinator". You should
complain about it when your coordinator does not respond or makes it
hard for contributors to contribute. Given Vikram's prompt reply, I
don't see any of those problems with your team.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759