Rob Weir wrote:
1) release new languages via lang packs only for now
2) release full installs, but for only these new languages
I don't see a big difference between a langpack and a full install in
this case, so I'd go for full installs, unless releasing langpacks helps
in communicating that these are "late" additions and that full installs
will come with the next release.
Can we really skip the release process? PO files == source, right?
Yes, not exactly but quite (PO files are not taken verbatim into source,
but they are imported and influence resource files which are in the
source tree).
Maybe a question for legal-discuss if we're not certain.
If in the end we have consensus on releasing new languages for 3.4.1
instead of making a new release, indeed we will ask.
How do we want to handle this on an ongoing basis? New point release
for every new language? Every 5 new languages? It is certainly good
for volunteers to get the encouragement of a fast turnaround for their
work. But this is the same for a C++ programmer.
There are big differences here, that are also the reason for me to
consider releasing these new languages as soon as possible:
- A translation is often done by a team; if we can publish it
immediately, the team can the be involved in other activities like
revamping the N-L website, local promotion and so on; if we wait too
much, we risk to have no volunteers for the following release.
Really? I'm not that convinced that this would happen. When we
communicate
from the beginning when new loalizations will be released then everybody
should be able to understand and handle this.
- Releasing a new language is totally risk-free: a new language can't
break functionality in OpenOffice, while any feature could have bugs and
needs more qualified testing.
Besides the comment from Jan I remember a case from the old OOo project.
There were some translations for the names of Calc functions that got the
same name but had to get (slightly) different names. The result was that
there were 2-3 sum, 2-3 average, etc. functions. This was also - more or
less the only - reason for another respin for a OOo RC; 3.2.1, 3.3.0, I
don't remember anymore.
So, the risk of new languages may not be high but I wouldn't say it's
totally risk-free.
In the end, I wonder whether the best solution is to get into a steady
release cycle of quarterly releases (every 3 or 4 months)?
+1
IMHO a regular release schedule is a very good idea. Then everybody can
cope with this, can see when the next version will come and we can plan
with a regular release plan (when to branch, freeze, localize, etc.).
Of course the timeframe will need some discussions to find the right one.
Previously it was tried to release every 6 months a new major release and
every 6 months a point release. So, with overlapping there was a new
release every 3 month. Maybe a good timeframe to continue?
