Re: a different workflow for DPN?
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 7:40 PM, David Prévot wrote:
> A next directory could have done the trick, so an index-next.wml file as we
> used one already in the past. I fail to see the benefit of changing the file
> names, making it harder to point to a direct URL when we ask for review and
> contribution, and in the HowTo make a DPN documentation. I also fail to see
> the benefit of a flat structure (I was pretty happy with my partial
> checkout, only caring about English and the French translation).
It would have been nice if you had objected when I made the proposal.
Shall I revert the layout to the previous one? Personally I find the
new one a lot cleaner.
> I notice those changes have been made without trying to reach the
> translation teams, that seems to hurry a bit stuff without coordination.
Sorry about that, I don't have much knowledge of translation workflows or teams.
> We already have a script to edit the mail from the online content (and
> making sure the content is online before sending the mail is a must).
> Please, do not impose a new workflow to translators without even asking
> them: e.g. even if the French team manage to publish a DPN translation in
> time, we currently send the mail a few days after it is published, to give
> more time for reviews. I have no idea of how other team works. Furthermore,
> we can't blindly trust the output of a script: even if the current script
> has been improved a lot (thanks Thomas), we usually review its output before
> sending the mail, and sometime fix stuff in it.
I had intended to:
make the new script a wrapper around the current script, since it does
that job well already.
not couple the send process for the English version with translations.
pipe the mail directly to the MUA of the person running it, to
facilitate pre-release reviews.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: