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

Re: Again about anonymous contributions to DDT*

On 08/12/2011 02:49 PM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
Quoting Michael Bramer (m.bramer@deb-support.de):

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?


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.

But debconf is different.

Nobody will see the translation, the maintainer is his god of his

But if some random maintainer/user translate his package description,
this translation is public and must be reviewed.

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.

this is distinct wrong.

You can write messages to a IP-User since years...

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.

Everybody make errors. A IP-User and a login-User.

If you have a login, your quality is not better. The login don't
change anything in the quality.

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 you like it, we can close the door for 'fr'. No Problem.

But you can't transfer you experience to all other languages.

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

If you force a login you will lost people.

And if the german team say: This is no problem, we make the review
process and the translation are at the end ok, this is ok.


Reply to: