On Nov 10, 2007 5:20 AM, Philip Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> As most of us know, we have many outdated translations... so let's
> discuss it:
>
> A) Critically old files:
>
> Many translations contain critically old files that should be either
> updated or offline. Some ideas that deal with these are:
>
> - Have the build system either not build/show them, or insert huge
> warnings (for users)
> - Add revcheck[1] tools that list all critically outdated files (for
> translators)
> - Better define what it means to be critically old (for all)
Since the "revision element discussion" didn't get us anywhere we have
no real why of figuring out why files or outdated or determine if a
file is really critically outdated or not :(
> B) File ownership:
>
> Translators typically insert maintainer information within each file.
> If a translator suddenly becomes inactive, these files essentially
> become unmaintained yet remain owned. I don't know the extent of this
> problem but can only assume it causes delays. Should we worry about
> allowing active translators to update any file... especially for
> critically old files? They (some) do anyways but let's make something
> official.
This is somewhat related to general crediting documentation writers
and the changelog discussion we've been talking about (offline).
I think however the main reason for the "file ownership" is so the
translators easily check the files they are interested in translating
and update them if needed without needing to scan the entire tree for
changes.
> D) Outdated translations:
>
> We have several translations that haven't [really] been updated for
> years, and it goes without saying that this is bad for everyone so
> let's make a plan. Here's one, let's discuss it:
>
> 1. Designate the deadest of the dead as INACTIVE_LANGUAGES via
> phpweb. ~18 of them. This means they won't show up via the select box
> at php.net, nor be selectable via my.php.
(and the user will not be automagically redirected to the translation,
even if they send out ACCEPT_LANGUAGE header for that language, and
the translation is not listed on php.net/docs nor
php.net/download-docs)
> 2. Write each list (doc-{lang}) asking if anyone out there is
> listening. If so, discuss the translation.
So if someone is "listening".. then what? Keep the 3year old language available?
I'm willing to bet that its way easier to start from scratch for 99%
of these translations.
> 3. Alter the php.net 404 handler to work with missing languages, so
> ar/manual/foo.php --> en/manual/foo.php
That shouldn't be a problem, for _missing_ translations, but for
translations that are in fact online and someone writes a
php.net/full/path/to/file.php..
> 4. Implement PhD to build active languages for mirrors rsync. Based
> on INACTIVE_LANGUAGES from phpweb/includes/languages.inc.
> 5. Implement PhD to build all languages, active and inactive, for
> docs.php.net.
> 6. Remove all dead/old/non-phd manuals. For example, kr/manual is
> from 2004. Currently some translations (even en/ within them) are not
> being updated/built.
Most of the translations online haven't even been rebuilt using xslt,
which I find terribly annoying - especially since there is a bunch of
legacy crap that is in my way and I'd like to remove - and their
layout is totally different from xslt, then adding phd builds on top
of that... its impossible to maintain three "almost like
markup/classes" and expect them all to look alike.
_We need those 18 translations disabled and phd builds pushed out_
I have no special feelings regarding removing them from phpweb or not.
-Hannes
