Hi Johannes As it is almost two weeks from your last email, I would like to ask whether you have come to any conclusion, or if not when do you think you will decide?
Kind regards Laco On 18 May 2010 08:59, <j...@jsschmid.de> wrote: > Hi Marcel! > > Thanks for your answer. I disagree with some points but that's perfectly > ok. After rereading my mail it sounded a bit personal and I want to > apologies for that as that wasn't my intention. Also thanks for > summarizing the content of the slovak page. > > To all: The GTP coordination team is carefully discussing this matter and > will decide soon whether we take any action and what that might be. In the > meantime, unless you have something really new I don't think it's worth to > extent this discussion further. > > So, everbody calm down a bit, do your work (that's actually what will > improve the translation status most) and you will hear from us. > > Thanks and regards, > Johannes > >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 01:19:11AM +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> > That's true. But if you have users, it does not automatically mean >>> > you'll have bug reports. Yes, you'll get some of them but it is not >>> > clear if it would be enough. From the past I know most of translation >>> > bugs we found were found during the translation update by translators >>> or >>> > during the review. Our user base is far smaller than German or even >>> > Czech. >>> >>> Note that this is not about the major things (because they will be >>> resolved during review) but about some remaining issues where >>> translators might have had a wrong thought. And people file more bug >>> reports than you think. >> >> It really depends. >> >> In most cases users are not able to find minor bugs easily. If the >> translated string looks reasonable but it is incorrect, the user will be >> hardly able to find the problem. In most cases to find the minor bug you >> need to compare the English original with the translated sentence. This >> is not a task most users do. >> >> If it was not easy for translator/reviewer to find the minor bug I do >> not believe the bug will be found/reported by an average user. >> >> The minor bugs can be find only by hard work in the translation team. >> >>> >>> > > there won't be any users and thus no bug reports. So, I would >>> encourage >>> > > you to drop the final review stage (now). >>> > >>> > To have this done I would have to set up more strict rules to become a >>> > reviewer. I opted for different approach: to allow all members to try >>> to >>> > do the reviewer's job to see how it will go. >>> > >>> > This allows us to catch at least some bugs by current reviewers. And >>> > this brings up a chance for potential good reviewer to show and >>> improve >>> > his work. In case I would allow to review only members to whom I can >>> > trust the proces would slow down even more. >>> >>> Sorry, I see a big problem here. You seem to trust very few people and >>> this will cause problems in an open-source projects. You simply need to >>> trust that people are willing to do good work and they will improve over >>> time. >> >> I review their work. My trust is based on observation. >> >>> >>> > This is not like launchpad. I agree. But the difference is not very >>> big. >>> > To have started a translation you just need to register to the Damned >>> > Lies, join the team, reserve for translation and submit a po file. You >>> > can do it in few minutes. I do not know how launchpad works, but I >>> think >>> > it would be similar easy. >>> >>> Yeah, but you have a po file then. That's great as it brings you a >>> translation for free if the person joins the team or not. There is no >>> point in rejecting those translations just because people didn't want to >>> join the team fully. (Of course, they should fix their stuff when it >>> gets reviewed). >> >> That's true. >> Without joining the team the review would be really hard. >> >>> >>> Also you didn't answer my inital question if you could drop the formal >>> introduction mail. >> >> Sure. I can. But let me elaborate a bit: >> >> In February 2010 few members of our team created a page where they >> summarized several things where the team organization should improve >> (acocrding their opinion). The page is here: >> >> http://live.gnome.org/SlovakTranslation/Others/N%C3%A1vrhy%20na%20zlep%C5%A1enie%20fungovania%20t%C3%ADmu >> >> Entry #1 is about joining the team. Rough (shortened) translation follows: >> >> Simplification of team joining >> ------------------------------ >> >> Supported by: Peter, Roman, Laco, Ivan. >> >> Pavol offered improvements for his web form so it can be used as needed. >> >> >> >> In April Pavol finished his work on the web form and I stated that on >> the page (rough translation): >> >> Status as of 2010-04-20: The web form works as expected. I consider this >> issue resolved. >> >> >> >> Nobody complained. It looked that we solved the issue with the >> registration email. >> >> >> About a month after that Peter picked up this as a reason for the >> coordinator change. >> >> >> >>> >>> > Unfortunatelly, this is not true. Sometimes the workflow knowledge of >>> > new members is poor. >>> >>> They managed to translate and upload the file? What else do they need to >>> know about the workflow as long as they aren't reviewers/committers? >> >> At least two things: >> 1. To use proper action for upload (if not the translation might be >> overlooked by rest of the team). >> 2. To reserve/upload again once the translation is returned back by a >> reviewer. >> >>> Please note that translating the file means that you already had to >>> setup lots of things. >> >> Yes. You need to download a file, start a random text editor, edit the >> file, and finally upload it. >> >>> > I agree. Now, we are in process to have such rules set up. >>> >>> I really wonder that you don't already have translation rules? How did >>> you manage to do things in the past? I think every half-way solid >>> GTP-Team has at least some list of most-used terms. >> >> We are going to be a half-way solid GTP-Team hopefuly soon. >> >>> > > Reviewers will notice when there is an inconsistency within the >>> strings >>> > > and are able to point that out. I think most teams have no problem >>> in >>> > > sharing modules between different translators. >>> > >>> > True. This is why I am doing now final review for all modules. I hope >>> > this will change soon. >>> >>> The reviewers != you - trust in them, they know the language! >> >> This is dangerous definition ("they know the language"). With some >> generalization you said that everybody knows his language in a way >> you'll trust them regararding the language matter. That is simply not >> true. >> >>> >>> > I disagree. It depends. Other translators can select other modules, so >>> > the rules are same for everybody. >>> > >>> > Some people does like to feel that this module is their work and they >>> > are responsible and proud for them. >>> >>> That's ok, but they should then be able to provide a 100% translation by >>> release date and if they cannot do that they will have to give up the >>> module or at least open it for others. >> >> This would be true is everything else is at (or near) 100 %, but not >> true if you are in the middle and there are plenty of untranslated (and >> free) modules. >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> -- >> +-------------------------------------------+ >> | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | >> | homepage: http://telka.sk/ | >> | jabber: mar...@jabber.sk | >> +-------------------------------------------+ >> > > > _______________________________________________ > gnome-i18n mailing list > gnome-i18n@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n > _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n