Re: Summary of Debconf i18n/l10n activities
On 6/6/06, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) <felipe@cathedrallabs.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
[ Adding -i18n ]
On 06/06/2006 02:04 PM, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 6/6/06, Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> wrote:
>> (this report is a little bit late as it took time to finalize
>> it...sorry for the inconvenience)
>>
>> The work on internationalisation (i18n) and localisation (l10n) at
>> Debconf6 has been particularly interesting and productive.
>>
>> (...)
>
> You wrote a good overview about the possible workflow, but i still
> miss exactly how we (or the coordinators) will merge from third
> parties (eg: Rosetta) and most important, how we will push our
> translations back to the upstream (eg: GNOME).
As I understood during DebConf, we would have to coordinate
efforts between different projects and upstream and one of the main
goals to our infrastructure is to be modular, so we can add a module
to import/export data from one system to another.
Sounds good. Keep in mind, that we will need to be ready to support not
structured projects so it should be easy for us track if a translation revision
(annotate) came from Rosetta, GNOME or it was made using our Pootle
setup.
> 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. 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.
(...)
>> Future plans for Debian l10n contributors
>> -----------------------------------------
>>
>> Reviving the DDTP - translated package descriptions as a release goal
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> (...)
>> Having working translated package descriptions as an "etch pet release
>> goal" for the Debian i18n team seems possible.
>
> Agreed. Btw, it would be better keep Etch package descriptions updated
> during its support cycle, but i think it's impossible with the
> infrascture we've, right ?
Hmmm, it depends on how the ftp-master team will deal with that.
There is a working version of DDTP at ddtp.debian.net and the
Translation-* files can be updated, we still need to check impact in
SecureAPT and related mirror/archive issues. Anyway, it should be
possible to keep it up-to-date during the support cycle.
Sounds interesting. I hope to see it translatable through the UI for
apps translation
too.
regards,
-- stratus
Reply to: