Le lundi 22 septembre 2008 à 09:53 -0500, Shaun McCance a écrit : > On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 12:45 +0200, Claude Paroz wrote: > > Le lundi 22 septembre 2008 à 11:01 +0200, Andre Klapper a écrit : > > > Am Montag, den 22.09.2008, 07:01 +0200 schrieb Jorge González González: > > > > there have been modifications of document strings up to the very same > > > > date of release, this is very sad. We already talked about "freezing" > > > > somehow doc translations so we could do our job, but developers keep > > > > updating it up to today. > > > > > > > > I know there is no freeze for docs, but still, you, developers, cannot > > > > think we can translate like this. > > > > > > I think we have this discussion in release-team every time we meet. > > > It boils down to the problem "Having better (updated) english > > > documentation vs. having more translated (but outdated) documentation". > > > Pick your poison. > > > For me it looks less useful to have translated but outdated docs. > > > > Sorry Andre, but I completely disagree here. The choice is not the one > > you presented. I could say the same with other freezes. E.g. with the UI > > freeze : do you want better and more polished UI rather than well tested > > and documented but minimal and uglier ones because of the freeze... > > As I've pointed out before, this analogy doesn't hold water. > It's not a matter of making the documentation more polished. > It's a matter of making it correct. > > If a program needs a string addition to give a user information > in the case of some error, that's polish. If the documentation > is telling you to click on button XYZ, but button XYZ does not > exist in the program, that's just flat out wrong. There is no > point in translating that sentence, because there are exactly > zero users who would be helped by reading it.
I don't contest the need to correct this, but the timeframe to do it. Moreover, freezes have exception processes, so obvious and critical errors could still be committed. > > It's a matter of process. When you put a freeze in place, you're simply > > telling people that they have to do their job in a specific timeframe. > > The objective here is to have updated AND translated docs. > > Stormy had a great blog post a few days back, talking about > how project releases are constrained by time, resources, and > scope. We currently have a fixed amount of time, and have a > very difficult time increasing our resources (i.e. writers). > Our scope (i.e. documentation quality) suffers. > > If you decrease our time without increasing our resources, > documentation quality will suffer. Please, please... we're talking about a some (3?) days freeze in a schedule of six months. > Please don't claim there is no respect for translators, as > you did in a previous email. That's pure flamebait. When you pass tenth of hours to translate a big document and you see half of it unvalidated by an update some hours before the release, try to imagine the feeling of the translator... > I put > a lot of work (along with Danilo) into making translators > able to do documentation with po files. I wrote an entire > DocBook toolchain in part because the existing solutions > didn't serve our translators well. > > I have put a lot of development time into making sure you > can have properly translated documentation. But I will > not take precious time away from our few valiant writers, > just so you can have a translated version of a document > that's not even correct or helpful in English. And you know that I'm also one of these few (albeit a minor one). We both defend our respective position (doc writer/translator). IMHO both are somewhat valid but unfortunately they conflict... and I don't see this thread going to change anything right now. Claude _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n