Francisco Vila <paconet....@gmail.com> writes: > 2013/1/14 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>> Probably the CG should be updated, improved and simplified. >>> I think that at the moment it would be a bit hard for a new translator >>> to get in. >> >> And I think we could make of several new ones or, probably needing >> similar measures, reactivate some old ones. >> >> It would also be nice to have some redundancy. > > Redundancy of contributors, or redundancy in CG to make things much > easier to find?
Redundancy of contributions. We currently have "one person does the translation once and nobody including himself looks at it ever after". As you aptly observed, that's the best you yourself can barely manage for Spanish. But I can't believe you to be the only LilyPond user natively speaking Spanish. The main qualification we should be requiring from translators and translation revisors is good command of language. Not ability to juggle with git and other technical stuff. So how can we move in a direction where translation work is less technically challenging? I believe that with regard to the program string translation (gettext, po, pot files or whatever), there is some sort of process that detaches the language teams from the technical details. Maybe we can move more in that direction for the manual texts as well? I don't have good suggestions here at the moment, but I should think that there is potential for getting more people involved for making their own language look better-suited for reading about and working with LilyPond. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
