Re: Requesting some room to install pootle.debian.org
On 8/24/05, Martin Quinson <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 07:09:55PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Tuesday 23 August 2005 18:44, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> > > Both tools seem very useful, although I think their purpose is quick
> > > translation and results are sometimes far from basic quality.
> > I agree with this.
> Me too. If you want my personal advice, there is no translation interface is
> preferable to this good old po mode.
The tyransdict tool has support for offline work. One can lock a set
of strings (which will autodelock after 7 days) so he/all can be sure
there is no duplicate work.
> Actually, what I try to setup is not really (not only) a web translation
> interface, but really a cooperative translation platform. In the french team
> (let's speak about what I know), there is translators, of course, but also
> reviewers and coordinators.
The web interface, imho, is good for translations marathons (no need
for linux machines, no need for kbabel, poedit or emacs).
> Coordination (or project administration, in pootle parlance) is to say who
> is in charge of translating what, what's everybody email address, deal with
> lost password and so on. That can be a dumb work which would drive every
> normal dude to animal. For example, in the Free TP project, there is over
> 150 sub-projects and about 20 teams. Only the email and assignment tasks
> generate over 10 mails a week on the central coordinator mailing list (not
> counting the mails on team mailing list which I don't monitor), each of them
> asking for a manual action from Karl, the poor guy in charge of this.
I think this is dealt with elegantly in transdict.
> In the french team, we came up with very complex methods to get every bit
> reviewed, since our language is hard enough to make sure that no one can
> write it right. But I still feel them quite handwork. The translator ask for
> review on the ML, and people send diffs back. It works well the first time,
> but when only a bunch of msgid were updated, reviewers either have to review
> the whole file, or to forget about the file completely.
I am not sure that review support is present in transdict, but I think
this is not a problem to implement (probably by integrating the
l10n-bot Debian specific software).
> Another domain where pootle could help is the statistic corner, like
> w.d.o/intl/l10n Having all translations in a uniq database would allow me to
> redo the dl10n scripts I were speaking about to Clytie yesterday, and
> directly display things on a neat web page. That way, it'd be easy to see
> what's still to be translated or what needs updating.
Transdict also has statistic support (per user, per application and
some others). Right Denis?
> > I would welcome a frontend for translations, but I would also like to
> > either be able to restrict who is able to touch certain translations or
> > have a review/approval mechanism before (changes in) translations are
> > committed.
> pootle provide an authentification mecanism, don't worry. This is also a
> strong requirement for the free tp, which hosts several FSF project
> translations, where maintainers require translators to sign a copyright
> disclamer before integrating their work. And write control in pootle can
> even be different for each msgid!!
transdict has also user authenication.
> Then, I'll work on a mail interface to do so, to allow complete offline
> work. The free tp robot works that way, I hope to be able to steal some code
> for that.
Probably adding this to the Croatian tool is not hard. And that could
be done as soon as the public CVS repo is avialable.
> So, in short, what I want to use from pootle is the centralized po files
> database. I don't care about the web translation thing, personnaly. But I've
> had some good feedback from translators who happenned to work with this. The
> more possible interface, the better, isn't it?
PS: Denis you could register yourself on the debian-i18n ml.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein