Re: Specifications for WordForge
On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 10:04 +0000, Gasper Zejn wrote:
> Dne sobota 20 maj 2006 13:43 je Christian Perrier napisal(a):
> > Javier Sola pointed me yesterday to the current
> > specifications of Wordforge.
> > Indeed it seems that many of the ideas we've been
> > exchanging around are addressed in that document.
> > All of thus that are here have seen Javier's presentation
> > about Pootle and more generally the Wordforge framweork and
> > concepts. I think this helped us a lot to understand that
> > Wordforge is much mor ethan Pootle and, indeed, that even
> > Pootle is much more than the Pootle some of us already know
> > about.
> > http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/wordforge/functional_
> > This is a very long document, but please try to read it if
> > you have some time. And be prepared: this is not carved in
> > stone stuff, this is something that Wordforge people are
> > ready TO DISCUSS and collaborate with.
> I'm sorry to be a bit late..
> The document indeed is lengthy and already covers nearly all
> we've discussed here, the differences being only debian
> specific. I haven't took time to look at it yet, but
> certainly Wordforge seems the way to go.
We're trying to come up to speed on Debian terminology, thanks for all
the links. Christiaans notes from Debconf help. We can then work at
> Seems that Pootle would only need some profiling love. ;)
If you run benchmark.py in Pootle/ you get some useful testing of
functionality and associated profiling, if you want to try.
We did this mostly to try identify startup performance problems but we
also added some testing of user interaction. We've plucked most low
hanging fruit here for startup and user interaction is not currently a
The next step for startup performance is to background/delaying some of
the indexing we are doing at startup.