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

Re: Ubuntu vs. Debian translations

Hash: SHA1

Sebastian Heinlein escribió:
> Am Dienstag, den 23.01.2007, 02:10 +0100 schrieb Frans Pop:
>> On Tuesday 23 January 2007 01:53, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
>>> That's certainly a flawed assumption. If you are providing translators
>>> an amicable interface to avoid handling technical details you cannot
>>> expect them to push things on to upstream.
>> Beautiful analysis of why Rosetta is not a good thing.
>> Short summary: it allows random people with questionable language and 
>> translation skills to dance all over the work of "upstream" translators 
>> without any kind of quality control and no communication with upstream.
> It depends on the single teams who they give write access to. The German
> translation team reduced its team member numbers, who have got write
> access, from 170 to around 10. There have been problems in the
> beginning, but all teams are working on solutions.
> It's the job of the coordinator of the corresponding Rosetta team to get
> into contact with upstream or to point the translators to upstream.
>> Rosetta is all about Ubuntu and not about the general Open Source Software 
>> _community_.
> This is right - currently. But a better review and upstream
> collaboration infrastructure is in work.

That's not true at all, Launchpad and thus Rosetta is not all about
Ubuntu, Ubuntu is the main 'user' of Launchpad and Rosetta, but there
are other people using us outside Ubuntu.

For instance, zope: https://launchpad.net/zope , GOME Backer:
https://launchpad.net/gnomebaker and Schooltool:

I agree that coordination from Ubuntu with upstream not using Launchpad
directly is not perfect, but as Sebastian already pointed, we are
working hard to improve it every day.


> Cheers,
> Sebastian

- --
Carlos Perelló Marín
Ubuntu => http://www.ubuntu.com
Alicante - Spain
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: