Re: Debian I18N from a Transdict POV [was: Re: Google summer of code]
Hello all, I will reparse this from a transdict POV. Transdict supports other formats than PO. OO, Mozilla and others were translated with it. - it could be improved to have web and e-mail based interfaces useful for both translators and reviewers Web inteface avialable, mail interface would have to be implemented Has translation memory and supports reviewers. As Christian said, we don't have the slightest idea what would fit our needs and how it could be engineered. If you want to tackle that idea and turn it into substance you are welcome aboard! I will keep everybody informed on this matter while I am working on it. Currently: - I have installed all the necessary dependencies (one was missing from Debian, but dh-make-perl came to the rescue ;-) - I have kept notes of the changes needed from a Debian POV - I am trying to set up the needed configurations. This has costed me about 3 days until now. I expect that I will manage to have it running and set up after 2 or three more days of actual work. To the transdict project a few screenshots have just been added (unfortunately in Croatian) that can show just a few of the Transdict capabilities. People interested can see them at http://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=147229 Will continue to keep you posted. -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
Debian I18N from a Transdict POV [was: Re: Google summer of code]
On 5/3/06, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 11:36:52PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: Reviewing the discussions that happened on the debian-i18n list recently would certainly be a good idea. Specially the paper that we wrote for Debconf6, which details the current infrastructure. It's currently available at http://people.debian.org/~jfs/debconf6/ I added that project to the wiki and the main idea I had is to work on developing (and implementing?) something that would tie up many of the loose ends we currently have in Debian's i18n/l10n. Such as translation statistics (of different elements, from program's PO to debconf note to the d-i), and translation robots (some teams have those in place now). I will reparse this from a transdict POV. Currently my tests regarding it (installation, usability) are on halt, but it has proven its viablity for quite some time within the Croatian translation team. I will restart these tests uring this weekend. We would like to be able to tie that up with some generic interface already available (like Pootle) but someone needs to assess if: - it would be viable for Debian i18n/l10n work (since not all the i18n/l10n sources are PO-based and I believe those frameworks rely heavily on it) Transdict supports other formats than PO. OO, Mozilla and others were translated with it. - it could be improved to have web and e-mail based interfaces useful for both translators and reviewers Web inteface avialable, mail interface would have to be implemented - it could be improved to have translation memories that could be shared through the different things that are translated in Debian (from documentation to PO files to package descriptions) Has translation memory and supports reviewers. As Christian said, we don't have the slightest idea what would fit our needs and how it could be engineered. If you want to tackle that idea and turn it into substance you are welcome aboard! I will keep everybody informed on this matter while I am working on it. Currently: - I have installed all the necessary dependencies (one was missing from Debian, but dh-make-perl came to the rescue ;-) - I have kept notes of the changes needed from a Debian POV - I am trying to set up the needed configurations. This has costed me about 3 days until now. I expect that I will manage to have it running and set up after 2 or three more days of actual work. I will be working on the debianization after I have tested a installation by hand. Will keep you posted. -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 4/7/06, Micah Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sorry. If we can't trust these people not to abuse upload privileges, then I certainly do not want to see them get a say in deciding how we conduct the project's business. By your argument, then the USA should give all its citizens access to our nuclear arsenal, launch codes, etc. because we trust them to have a say in deciding how the government is run. Hmm, I see, you see yourself as government. That would explain the dictatorial thinking as every governship tends to enslave the governed people. You should think of yourself as a representative of the users instead of their master. I wonder where did this go Our priorities are our users and free software. Probably, you forgot, but you are talking about Debian's users here in general and constant contributors here. Eiether we trust them, in which case we should induct them in as full members, or we don't, and in that case they do not get to vote. There are many people in my organization that I trust completely, who do not have root on our boxes. They dont have root because of a number of very obvious reasons that have nothing to do with trust in other areas. Your point being? Please talk about Debian, not some organization of yours. The way you conduct your buisness does not affect Debian, or at least it shouldn't. Your rigid definition of trust = upload don't make sense to me. Yes, you have to be trusted to be able to upload, but you dont have to have upload abilities to be able to be trusted. Somehow, your argument is twisted. Nobody said that in order to trust someone, we should let him upload and see what will that person do, but quite the oposite was said - once you trust, upload should be fine, without abuses. -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 4/8/06, Micah Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By your argument, then the USA should give all its citizens access to our nuclear arsenal, launch codes, etc. because we trust them to have a say in deciding how the government is run. Hmm, I see, you see yourself as government. That would explain the dictatorial thinking as every governship tends to enslave the governed people. This is a very surprising misunderstanding of what I wrote. I do not see myself as government, I do not see Debian as government. From you message I understood you looked at uploading rights as the path to absolute war or dominion over foreigners or domestic population (you compared WMD with upload rights)... Additionally, I do not see where you are seeing dictatorial thinking in what I wrote, in then you let to be understood that people should not have a word in the way the govern does its job (we trust them to have a say in deciding how the government is run). For me that looks like a dictatorship definition, if you don't allow the people say anything. Sadly, this is how Debian is conducting votes currently (they do not represent the users, but themselves), so from this point of view this looks like you are in favor of keeping non mainatiners outside. It is true that you didn't said something like that explicitly, but that's how it resulted from the explained reasoning. fact, I am starting to wonder how you can see so clearly what I am thinking, perhaps your surveillance equipment has given you information about my thoughts that I have not yet thought, but I will? Yes, of course, but unfortunately, now I will have to kill you :) What is particularly suprising is that you are attacking me viciously, when I believe that we have the same views on this subject, however you That was not al all clear from your message... in fact the opposite was, otoh. have extrapolated meanings far beyond what I said through a process of misunderstanding what I actually wrote, to think I am actually against you. Taking this mail into account, yes. I'm sorry for doing that. Maybe I should cool down and not get too angry when I feel people are stubborn and refuse progress (because I might be having a wrong idea) You should think of yourself as a representative of the users instead of their master. My message disagrees with the original poster's, which means that I think that more people should get a say in how we conduct the project's business, not less. Yes, you wanted to say that people getting in should not be granted upload rights, although voting rights are ok, while Manoj was stating that if we trust people that much that we allow them to vote, upload rights can be given with the confidence they will not abuse it. In other words, you regard upload rights higher than vote (at first sight, but in fact you are stating that upload rights should be given on a need basis), while he is doing the inverse, stating that vote is more important that upload. So, AFAICT, you were not contradicting him, but stating another thing, while it looked to me that you don't agree. I wonder where did this go Our priorities are our users and free software. Probably, you forgot, but you are talking about Debian's users here in general and constant contributors here. Eiether we trust them, in which case we should induct them in as full members, or we don't, and in that case they do not get to vote. There are many people in my organization that I trust completely, who do not have root on our boxes. They dont have root because of a number of very obvious reasons that have nothing to do with trust in other areas. Your point being? Please talk about Debian, not some organization of yours. The way you conduct your buisness does not affect Debian, or at least it shouldn't. Please dont tell me what I can and cannot talk about, I thought you were against dictatorial repression? If you want to talk about dictatorial, repression, then we can talk business, but I am not talking about I was pointing out that external examples might not be the best idea. I could give you an example of a bad organisation, but thta might not be relevant in the debian context because other rules apply. My point is that someone who does work for debian does not need to have the ability to upload in order to be part of debian in some sort of 'officially' enfranchised manner. I think it is completely sane to have official debian people who do not have upload access. Yes, that might be true, but a NU (new uploader) process should not appear in the path to get those rights when needed. I suspect that from a pragmatic POV, giving upload rights imediately is better, but I might be wrong. Somehow, your argument is twisted. Nobody said that in order to trust someone, we should let him upload and see what will that person do, but quite the oposite was said - once you trust, upload should be fine, without
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 4/6/06, JC Helary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about calling it New Developer if that's what it should be? New Member ? That would have the advantage (and disadvantage, at the same time) the the abbreviation stays the same. Advantage, because of people inertia calling it NM Disadvantage, because the change will not be so evident from the outside (more of a publicity issue, but that is what a part of the problem is, so we need to change the image that DD=package maintainer) -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 4/6/06, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did it ever occur to you that one can be an active Debian contributor and not use Debian at all ? No. And even if it did, I fail to see how that is relevant here. You cannot be an active Debian contributor without knowing about its culture, which is what Marc was talking about. Tell that to Clytie. -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 4/6/06, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nobody's saying that you are going to stop being a developer. You can be proud of what you do being a developer. You've earned that status. But requiring people who are not software developers to understand they suddenly have become developers because Debian is special is a little far fetched. I don't see why. Because we should not redefine common used language in order not to offend present DDs, but we should make it clear that DD does not have to be == packager/coder. Because the people aproaching Debian should not go away because they realise we are redefinig words. Heck, we _shouldn't_ redefine them. Is a really broad acception that developer==code developer==programmer. -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 4/5/06, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How can someone who is not a package maintainer become a developer, if becoming a developer requires being a maintainer? Not quite, if you contribue to different areas with your effort, you can bexom a DD, see NM page. -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein
