Hi Frans, On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 06:31:19PM +0200, Frans Spiesschaert wrote: > Wolfgang Schweer schreef op ma 27-07-2020 om 00:00 [+0200]: > > > It's actually quite easy to create those $lang.add files without > > involving translators because only two strings need to be translated, > > with the translation already contained in the related PO file. Let me > > try to explain this using the content of the > > debian-edu-bullseye-manual.nb.add file as an example: > > I am unsure how to comment on this, because I am confused about a few > preliminary questions I have: > > 1. what scheme exactly do we consider as the most preferable scheme for the > future with regard to translation credits? Thanks for raising these questions. > As far as I understand, different schemes have been mentioned already, such > as: > > * translation copyright notices and credits for all languages that have a > translation for a certain manual (let's say debian-edu-bullsaye manual) are > included in the source (AllInOne.xml) of that manual and in all the > generated manuals. > This is the scheme that is in use now. Right. I propose to change it. That's why I referred to the debian/copyright file of other comparable packages like e.g. debian-reference. No translators mentioned, see: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/developers-reference/-/raw/master/debian/copyright > * all translation copyright notices and credits are dropped from the manual > source and from all the generated manuals. That's possible, but wouldn't honor the hard work of translators. > But in between these two widely differing schemes, others were also > mentioned, without however being clearly specified. > > One could for instance think of: > > * the manual source includes all translation copyright notices and credits > for all languages that have a translation, but the translated documents > only have that specific translation copyright notice and credits that is > applicable to their own language. That would force us to continue editing the wikis like before... Adding people having translated a few strings via Weblate and thus listing also translations that are not published at all. Also, compare it to a book translated from English into twenty other languages. There's probably a hint somewhere about the number of translations, but the English edition won't mention translator names. The Spanish edition would mention the person that did the Spanish translation, though. > * the manual source includes no translation copyright notices and credits, > but the translated documents do have a specific translation copyright > notice and credits that is applicable to their own language, while the > English manual only has general copyright information and no copyright > information about translations at all. Yes, that's what I would prefer. > Perhaps other schemes are conceivable too. Depending on the chosen scheme, > the possible technical solutions could differ, as I see it. Right, solutions would differ. > 2. debian/copyright now depends on the actual scheme in use. So, if we > should move away from it, this would affect the generation of that file. > Is it important to take this relationship into account while choosing a > scheme, or can we easily disregard this? Agreed. The debian/copyright file wouldn't mention translators so need to be generated differently. Wolfgang
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature