[Recombining the thread] On 12 Sep 2011, at 12:43, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 12 September 2011 12:34, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote: >> >> On 12 Sep 2011, at 10:55, Ross Gardler wrote: >> >>> We need to manage this carefully. A Japanes language list to ensure >>> non-English speaking people are able to participate in the project is >>> fine. A Japanese language list for creating a different version of OOo >>> for the Japanese market is not fine. >> >> The reality is likely to be somewhere in-between. For example, the PT-BR >> localisation of OOo was the subject of extensive discussion in Portuguese >> about exactly how to translate various aspects of the UI, none of which >> would be of great relevance to English-speakers but which was still >> development discussion. The same would be likely to apply to every locale. >> > > Let me clarify "different version" I meant significantly different, > not just a translation. You say "just a translation" but the debate on the PT-BR version led to two competing releases for a time, with an impact on the community there which lingers to this day. Localisation of a consumer application is never "just a translation" as might happen to the strings in a server project; substantial end-user decisions are debated, negotiated and agreed by thoughtful developers. /The/ key reason for the success of OpenOffice.org is that there exists a large, global community of groups of localisers who each act in autonomy or semi-autonomy to create the release for each locale. Your message is a wake-up call that we need to put a lot more thought into how the project will approach them, especially if they will need to be separate projects in order to retain their locale-specific autonomy. On 12 Sep 2011, at 12:44, Ross Gardler wrote: > On 12 September 2011 11:50, Ian Lynch <ianrly...@gmail.com> wrote: >> If there is to be a NL build of the AOO product to be >> released, presumably that build will take place at Apache? Or could it take >> place elsewhere but only be formally released by Apache? > > It depends on what you mean by "takes place". Anyone can build > anything they want, wherever they want. However a formal release of an > Apache project must receive 3 binding +1's. The vote to get those > votes *must* be carried out here on the official dev list (this one). So the release of (for example:) a new PT-BR binary needs three binding +1s on this (English-speaking) list? S.
