2013/4/10 Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 4:34 AM, janI <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On 10 April 2013 10:20, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 4/10/13 10:06 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > > > Rob Weir wrote: > > > >> My proposed landing page is here: > > > >> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/untranslated.html > > > > > > > > The page and the strategy are good. I wonder what the best timing is > (I > > > > don't have an answer). > > > > > > > > Between now and 4.0 (but possibly all within 10 days or so) we will > see > > > > the following l10n-relevant changes: > > > > > > > > 1) Strings to be translated: OpenOffice 3.4.1 -> OpenOffice 4.0 > > > > > > > > 2) New Pootle server (which might offer good performance and, after > > > > discussion, the possibility to register non-committers accounts) > > > > > 10 days is cutting it a bit short, something like 2 weeks sounds better. > I > > have to get 2.5 installed, and the configuration of the current vm is not > > as documented/straight forward as it could have been. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Strings refactoring (40 PO files instead of 240) > > > > > There has been an offlist discussion, and consensus is that we need to > test > > this caredully once I think it works, therefore it will not be released > for > > 4.0 > > > > We might releasee it for helpcontent2 (8 files instead of many), that > > depends on my capability to dig out the last build system problems. > > > > > > > > > 4) New internal localization process, i.e., how we integrate PO > files. > > > > This is less visible for translators, anyway, > > > > > Same as 3. > > > > > > > > > > Starting the call immediately and then having at least three major > > > > workflow changes would be problematic. So what I don't know is the > > > > order/timeframe of actions 1-3. Can anyone make an estimate? If it > > makes > > > > sense (i.e., if we have plans for major changes in the very near > > future) > > > > we might want to do one or more of these actions before issuing a > large > > > > call for volunteers. > > > > > > I would avoid any bigger change in parallel to the 4.0 translation. > Once > > > we have the sidebar branch on trunk we should first check how big the > > > changes are compared to 3.4.1 > > > > > I agree, but only due to the time frame constrain. I think it would be > > better to have the po file change in 4.0 where everybody expects changes > > not backwards compatible, but that would problaly delay 4.0 a month. > > > > > > Another option is to put off the push for more languages. So with 4.0 we > just work to update the languages we already have, but bring in additional > languages later. This might be done as a "second edition" of 4.0, as we > did with the additional 3.4.1 languages. >
+1 Regards Ricardo > > -Rob > > > > > > rgds > > Jan I. > > > > > > > > Juergen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Andrea. > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
