Quoting Michael Bramer (firstname.lastname@example.org): > >What I would like to hear, at least to be able to *understand* is why > >activating anonymous contributions makes this any better. > > because ip-users make the work. They don't make problems, they don't > make spam, ... > > Why will you close the door for some random debian user? Because: > Maybe some reason: > - we have a bug in the 'login' process (I don't think so) > - someone don't like cookies > - someone don't like the 1001 useless online account with passwort > - someone like to only translate his 3 packages I don't want the latter. Really. There's nothing worse than a maintainer translating "his|her" packages. They usually don't follow l10n teams conventions and style. The same indeed happens with debconf templates. I want to hear about other reasons and I want us to work on them. *No single i18n project* allows anonymous contributors to work with translations. Just check LibreOffice, GNOME, KDe et al. > What is the problem, with a contribution as IP-user? You can't mail the user. You can't make suggestions to them. You can't interact with those active contributors. In short, you're losing energy. > If we habe problems, we can close the door. But we don't have any > problems with IP-Users? Have we? Rhonda had very valid arguments such as the need to be able to discuss terminology issues with users. The few contributions I've seen for French translations, coming from IP addresses, were often crap. OTOH, when I work on some files translated by someone really identified, I often know by advance what to look about. In clear, there are some contributors from the French team, where I will mùake very careful reviews because I know they're often doing spelling errors, or using jargon we don't want, etc. There are others where I will be much less picky because I know they follow our guidelines. This is in general why I want to know who is translating and why non anonymity does encourage quality. > If I understand the german team in the right way: > - the main work is made from some people (2-4) > - The ip-user don't make problems, but make some work > I check the logs: > - I find IP, who > - fetch a description (64 fetchs from 128 description in progress) > - make a review (7 ) > > Why should we close the door, if the IP-User don't make problems? *we don't know*. The IP user makes a lot of translations, very few reviews. Maybe (s)he's doing many mistakes, that are hidden because others are doing reviews. Maybe not. Why would it hurt to at least try getting this user work less anonymously?
Description: Digital signature