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

Re: Summary of Debconf i18n/l10n activities

On 6/6/06, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) <felipe@cathedrallabs.org> wrote:
Hash: SHA1

On 06/06/2006 04:02 PM, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 6/6/06, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) <felipe@cathedrallabs.org>
> wrote:
>> On 06/06/2006 02:04 PM, Gustavo Franco wrote:
>> > On 6/6/06, Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> wrote:


>> > I think there's a lot of translations being done for different apps in
>> > Rosetta, but it's not pushed back to their upstream, so we need to
>> > keep in mind that we will do a lot of "bridge"
>> > (Rosetta->Pootle<->Projects) work to start, just in this scenario.
>>         Rosetta has problems with legal aspects of the translations and
>> also problems of translation QA. We still have to figure out how good
>> will be for us to push these translations back. (Maybe translate it
>> again is more worthwhile than review it).
> The legal aspects should be sorted out before importing anything,
> right.

        People involved with Rosetta should work on that. :-)

They did with the wiki content, probably they will do the same thing
or something similar with Rosetta translations. The question is if it
will be free.

> I think push the translations would be good if we've the track
> feature
> i pointed out above and if it was merged as 'pending' or 'suggestion' for
> a reviewer. It should be done for any third party project, we should just
> trust our translation once we merge with upstream (GNOME, KDE, ...), IMHO.

        The real problem, is that we have reports of people overwritten
translation using Rosetta, and usually, with bad translations, which
means that we can trust *our* translation, but we still need to check
if it is worthwhile to review translation from others or just translate
it again in the "Right Way (tm)" (and there is still the license problem,
how to push something without being allowed to).

If the content we're merging is free, there's no problem show this to the
reviewer and let him accept or refuse the translation. It's way simpler to do
than rewrite everything again. If the translation was overwritten in a
'source' (eg:
Rosetta), we should show the translation we've and the alternative
translations as suggestions.

-- stratus

Reply to: