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

Re: [faw@funlabs.org: Re: DDTP-Links on CDD tasks web pages]

2008/7/16, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) <faw@funlabs.org>:
>  >>        Yes, but DDTSS is not a interface to provide descriptions
>  >> for CDD Task Pages
>  >
>  > Uhm, that's a really stupid argument.
>         Thanks, very kind of you to say so.

No that is neither kind nor unfriendly.  Your argument contains the
same value of truth like: A computer is not a device you should use to
play music but just to do mathematical calculations.

>         First of all, I don't think you really understand the
>  Brazilian scenario to draw any conclusions, pt_BR is a very
>  active team regarding DDTP (and has been for quite some time),
>  and yes, "packages of special interest for some CDD tasks"
>  really gave us twice as much work when the "first script"
>  start crawling the DDTSS and we had to block Alioth because
>  of it.

Well, I'm really sorry that the first script which was invented by a
CDD team member resulted in certain hassle for you.  That's sad and I
can understand your anger.  But I refuse to accept that you would like
to blame any other script written by the same team for the same things
without having had a look at it.  I'm currently talking about a link
(or rather a set of links) which are placed on (autogenerated) static
HTML pages.  Links, just simple links that are pointing to the DDTPS

>         As Helge pointed out, deeply knowing a subject doesn't
>  mean that someone are good translators, in fact, the two
>  things are orthogonal, we had find good replies and reviews
>  from "interdisciplinary" mailing lists.

Well, the translation team of www.debian.org told me about trouble in
understanding of the descriptions.  My intend was to help not to
question your work.  (BTW, I had a certificat about a two year study
of so called "specific translator in the field of physics" - it was a
quite popular study at my university so at least there are people who
think that it makes sense if you translate texts you can perfectly
understand.)  But that's no topic which needs to be discussed here.

>         Anyway, the point is not determine if a team needs
>  help, I believe that most teams would agree that we really
>  need more human power, the point is that DDTSS was created
>  as tool for translators,

Great.  Lets focus on this point.

>  not as an interface for another page,

Which page are you talking about?  Any link?

>  right now, it lacks the ability that you desire,

In this sentence you assume that you know what I desire, right?
In the next paragraph you want me to explain my expectations.
Hmmm ...

>  sorry if it is not what you want to hear, as already said,
>  the behavior right now, gives extra work for the teams
>  instead of helping them.

So linking to your page is no help?  Are there other pages in the web
that provide links to ddtp.debian.net?  What is the difference to the
CDD tasks pages?

>         Right now (and once again, like in the first try)
>  I believe the real problem is a "communication" one, so,

Ohh, here we definitely agree.

>  would you be kind to explain what in DDTSS doesn't fulfill
>  your expectations?

OK, I try to assemble of older postings worth reading if you know what
I like to know:  In short: How can I help the DDTP project reasonably.

    == I found a solution: "What do you think..."

    "Do you think that these links are doung things right or is it
     causing trouble for DDTP?"

    "I want to know whether this
       1. makes sense for DDTP project
       2. makes sense for the user ..."

    Explains in detail which links I use for those who refuse to read
    the HTML text which I use to link to DDTPS.
    "Do you have any more questions why I use the force option???"

    So should I remove all the links from the CDD tasks pages to the
    DDTSS server?

    "is there a chance to translate for these people or is there no such

Summary: I try to find out in more than 10 mails to your list (these
are not all) whether the solution I found without your help is fine
for you.

>         The initial abuse was loading *twice* a day
>  descriptions that were already translated, what most of
>  us is trying to do is avoid that once again, that's
>  why Michael asked to not force loading the already
>  translated file.

I just said sorry for this what happened in the past.  Could we please
stop this for the moment because it is completely unrelated for the
current case?

>         I'm not sure about other teams, but "coordination"
>  is always appreciated, so simply "fixing" a description
>  without discussing it before is not exactly the best way
>  to go, if there is a different consensus, loading the
>  description would simply mean re-reviewing it to get rid
>  of it from the "working to do".

Please accept that I desperately trying to find out how I could
coordinate with you how to fix a translation.  Please trust me that
I'm able to detect and fix simple spelling bugs in my mother language
which even a simple spell checker would have detected.  Could you
finally be so kinf to explain me the right way to go if I want to get
this fixed?  Is this question to hard to answer?

>         So, how exactly you want to support us?

I want to provide translations and I want to provide fixes for

>  Wouldn't point people to mail lists and DDTSS be good enough?

When I was starting with DDTP server it was a mail driven automatical
system.  I liked it.  I was able to provide translations - I was happy
beeing able to help.  There was no need to argue about why I want to
help and whether my help is welcome.

>  If it is a "hit-and-run" fix it might not be desirable. :-(


>         Tell them how to use DDTSS and how to contact the
>  translation teams to coordinate their work. There is some
>  discussion about adding a "header" for the translation
>  pages that could be used by the translation teams as an
>  information point to new translators.

My way of telling them was linking to


and filling in the parameter known as "Fetch specific description".
Before I did so I started a query here on this list and asked whether
this is the right way to tell them.  Do you think that I should share
the experience to ask questions here on this list with other volunteer
translators?  (I'm sorry if I sound angry - I am angry which is not my
normal temper, but I can not help currently.)

>         I didn't make any accusations and I didn't read
>  the code that generates the task pagess

... and you don't have to.  Reading the result was what I was asking
for and I hoped that could be done in a minute.

>  I just pointed
>  out that ddt.cgi has a different interface from DDTSS
>  that might be what you are looking for, after all, DDTSS
>  used ddt.cgi in the principles, now it is integrated.
>         You want to fix a broken translation, just do
>  what we do, load it into DDTSS and fix it,

I think I do so and my question is: Is the way I'm doing it the right
way.  I did not yet got a definite answer.

>  but it is
>  important to coordinate it with the Translation Team,
>  some teams have standard practice to review similar
>  problems in various packages.

... which is what I constantly try but the Translation team obviosely
does not tries to understand the question.

>  > Well, on what list do you think should a fix for a broken translation
>  > apear.  What exactly is the priority of the translation teams if it
>  > are not translations that are not correct and some kind soul tries
>  > to provide a fix.  Are we talking about cooperation in Free Software
>  > world or are there some different principles here???
>         Translation teams have their priorities, it is
>  related to the priorities of the packages and POPCON500,
>  some teams take an alphabetical approaches, some teams
>  uses a "suite approach" (packages related to firefox).

So if I found a broken translation you want me to go up in popcon list
or alphabethical to fix another translation first??? Should I ask the
translation team whether they want me to send a fix??? What are you
talking about???

>         Now, imagine if you link to a package using
>  "force fetch" and people just click to see it, it will
>  load the translation without nothing to fix, it is not
>  about "fixing' things, it is about reviews unnecessary
>  files (and some teams have only one or two people).

Well, because I did not know which effect force might have I was
asking.  There was until now one single answer


which says "I understand andreas" (pew) and "put all 'klicks' on the
pending list and this add a load to the ddtss translators."  So should
I or should I not remove the links from the CDD tasks pages?  But
please explain in how far this is different than filling the form in
the very same way.

>  > I have no idea why you are a providing a web interface for translations
>  > without sufficient description and you give me the impression that this
>  > should not be used.  The more I dive into this the more I wonder whether
>  > you need people who try to translate.
>         I have no idea why you think it doesn't have
>  enough description,

Because you asked me to describe volunteer translators what they
should do.  I the web page to which I'm linking fails to be self
explanatory something is missing here, right.

>  some teams are using its

Fine.  What makes the difference between these teams and visitors of
the CDD pages.

>  and we
>  have been working to improve in the last two years
>  and DDTSS is a very good interface for most of the
>  teams, it helped a lot of them in the review cycle.

Sounds good.

>         As I said, people that wants to translate
>  should join the teams, I don't believe in "isolated"
>  contributions without coordinating to the team, even
>  for POs or PO-debconfs, it usually need some sort of
>  review from other team members.

Exactly this is my intent.  The CDD tasks pages show descriptions of
packages covering a similar topic.  This is just another point of view
on coordination and by no means isolated but the contrary.

>  > Grisu, if this whole CGI stuff should not be used do you think it is
>  > better to generate a mail and let the user use the mail interface
>  > to provide translations?
>         Unilaterally "fixing" the translations without
>  coordinating such changes is not the way to go. :-(

Once again:  What is the correct way to go if I see a description
translation with several spelling errors?

Kind regards



Reply to: