[l10n-dev] CVS access to .po files?

[Sveinn í Felli]

Hi,

I'm forwarding a question brought to me:

"Why aren't the Icelandic translations available on the CVS
server?  I have always been fetching the latest
localizations from
anoncvs.services.openoffice.org/cvs/l10n/l10n/source.
Is it obsolete?"

Is there any other place we could parse the .po files (for
glossary purposes) which are in pootle2 ?

Best regards,

Sveinn í Felli


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Martin Srebotnjak]

2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 

> BTW:
> Please don't hit me when I use Firefox as example ;-) but Mozilla has also
> split it up (fully localized and beta):
> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
>
>
I am localizing many OS software packages, but not even one requires QA for
every language and every release like OOo does. AFAIK neither does Firefox
(I contributed the Calendar Slovenian translation, but never did any QA,
just tried the builds for translation appearance).

The only reason we are all rooting for inclusion of untested builds on the
main download page is to promote OOo and make our localized more present.

I guess for the future there is a need to link the QA system and extended
servers/list of available builds with a script that checks the files
available on the extended servers and their status of QA and displays the
downloads with all appropriate markings. The script needs only to be run
once for every release (or manually rerun daily for possible QA status
changes).

Well, enough for tonight. Good night everyone.

Lp, m.

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Martin Srebotnjak wrote:

Hi Martin,


Wouldn't this table look much better, if it was only one?
And if the tested/release versions cells would have a green background
indicating these are the ones that are green-state in QA?


the question is not if it looks better but if it would be an advantage 
for the average user. And even if it is maybe clear but the color game 
has to be explained, too.


If it would be one table then it would include every bit and byte. I 
don't think that this would increase the good overview and doesn't 
confuse the people.


I like to stick with the separation of tested and untested files.

BTW:
Please don't hit me when I use Firefox as example ;-) but Mozilla has 
also split it up (fully localized and beta):

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html

Furthermore please remember that someone has to maintain this list until 
the next release is coming. Our current release process and tooling is 
better with splitting the tables.



It confuses user if she finds her language in the first table but not the OS
she looked for (yeah, it is stated in the above text, but mostly people
won't read it).


Maybe but then we should think of a better layout or wording in the text.

Best regards

Marcus




2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 


Hi all,

as an alternative I've created a langpack website with all files listed in
2 tables:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_all.html

Maybe we can agree on this as commpromise?

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:


Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
websites to ease the download of RC builds:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not
easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)

Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look like.
It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are already released
have to be deleted from here, of course).

Once we have a final state I would update the index page (
http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can be
found via links and make some announcements.

Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:


Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with builds,
testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels offend. This was
not my intension or to ignore the situation.

I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the users
(tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high number this will
be not easy. And take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)

Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence the
next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.

Best regards

Marcus



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Martin Srebotnjak wrote:

2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 


because it is the official suffix before it get tested and released. It's
the same with a beta release.

 Yes, they are not released so they remain release candidates, but actually

the actual code is same as released version. I think this degrades the
second table and makes some users wonder if this is the right place to
download builds from.


I don't think so because all builds have the same version number and the
difference between final and RC is also written down above both tables: it's
tested and untested.



I know, but I have a friend who wanted to download OOo 3.1 and got to
Slovenian download page and downloaded it. Since in the name of the file
itself included string RC2 he thought this is not a final release, as if it
was a beta or something one should not try if not a computer engineer so he
didn't install it...


do you think he would install it when he reads that it is untested? ;-)

I would say let's stick with it now and collect more experience.


There are many people who do not understand what RC means and even if you
give them a link to explanation or even explain it on this page, the first
thing they will search on this page is "Swedish" or "Slovenian" ...

I believe it is enough to distinguish the builds with the tested/untested
title, but not with "3.1.1 and older" and "3.1.1 RC", because they will not
get it, it is just so alike.

Also, the gsicheck tool should be made so bulletproof that if a SDF is
tested as OK there would be just no way that it can break a build - that way
testing for all language versions would become really obsolete. Or it should
be only tested in selected representative builds (some latin based scripts,
like one Slavic, one simple latin then one Cyrillic or Greek, one or more
Asian languages etc.) and not for every single language on the list. But
that is another topic... If it works for Czech language I am almost sure it
will work with Slovenian language, so maybe this is how the Slovenian team
could QA builds :)


Yeah, testing Czech and if it's good then approving Slovenian. :-)

But there is even a better increase: Make OOo bulletproof so that no QA 
... you know the end.


Best regards

Marcus

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Martin Srebotnjak]

2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 

> because it is the official suffix before it get tested and released. It's
> the same with a beta release.
>
>
>  Yes, they are not released so they remain release candidates, but actually
>> the actual code is same as released version. I think this degrades the
>> second table and makes some users wonder if this is the right place to
>> download builds from.
>>
>
> I don't think so because all builds have the same version number and the
> difference between final and RC is also written down above both tables: it's
> tested and untested.


I know, but I have a friend who wanted to download OOo 3.1 and got to
Slovenian download page and downloaded it. Since in the name of the file
itself included string RC2 he thought this is not a final release, as if it
was a beta or something one should not try if not a computer engineer so he
didn't install it...
There are many people who do not understand what RC means and even if you
give them a link to explanation or even explain it on this page, the first
thing they will search on this page is "Swedish" or "Slovenian" ...

I believe it is enough to distinguish the builds with the tested/untested
title, but not with "3.1.1 and older" and "3.1.1 RC", because they will not
get it, it is just so alike.

Also, the gsicheck tool should be made so bulletproof that if a SDF is
tested as OK there would be just no way that it can break a build - that way
testing for all language versions would become really obsolete. Or it should
be only tested in selected representative builds (some latin based scripts,
like one Slavic, one simple latin then one Cyrillic or Greek, one or more
Asian languages etc.) and not for every single language on the list. But
that is another topic... If it works for Czech language I am almost sure it
will work with Slovenian language, so maybe this is how the Slovenian team
could QA builds :)

Lp, m.

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Martin Srebotnjak wrote:

Hi Martin,


Hi, I think this is better.

Why are the untested builds marked as RC2? I mean, you already divided the
tested/approved and untested builds into two tables, why make users wonder
if this RC2 might mean this is not really 3.1.1 (or whatever the latest
version is)?


because it is the official suffix before it get tested and released. 
It's the same with a beta release.



Yes, they are not released so they remain release candidates, but actually
the actual code is same as released version. I think this degrades the
second table and makes some users wonder if this is the right place to
download builds from.


I don't think so because all builds have the same version number and the 
difference between final and RC is also written down above both tables: 
it's tested and untested.



Also, my two-cent suggestions:
A) make the preceding text in the top of the page shorter, more to the
point, so the user reads the really relevant things, and the tables begin
sooner;
Example: you have two similar sentences/passages that could probably be
merged into one or one could be shortened because of the other:
1) "A language pack contains only resource files for a specific language and
platform to show, e.g., menus and dialogs in your language. If available the
help content is also translated."
2) It is possible that not all elements of the user interface (e.g., menues
and dialogs) or the help topics are localized and therefore shown in English
as default language.


OK


B) the sections and shortcuts to both tables should be renamed to something
more meaningful:
1) for the first section "OOo 3.1.x QA-approved language packs" ; the
wording "and older" makes one wonder if they are obsolete; 3.1.x says it
all, the latest available version is displayed;
2) for the second section I suggest "OOo 3.1.1 untested language packs";


The table heading describe it already with more words. I wanted to keep 
the links to the tables short.


C) the "Linux 32-bit RPM" header and "Linux 32-bit DEB" header in the second
table can be spanned together (span="2" or whatever) into one
"Linux 32-bit" because every link then states "deb" or "rpm"; same goes for
the Linux 64-bit headers, that can become one;

D ) sentence "For production, use the builds from the first table." is
funny; if I want Slovenian, how can I use the first table? Will I download
Serbian instead? I mean ... The preceding sentences already say it all: "*The
software offered in the second table is not recommended for production
deployment. Use on own risk.*"


OK, funny things deleted. ;-)

Best regards

Marcus




2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 


Hi all,

as an alternative I've created a langpack website with all files listed in
2 tables:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_all.html

Maybe we can agree on this as commpromise?

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:


Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
websites to ease the download of RC builds:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not
easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)

Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look like.
It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are already released
have to be deleted from here, of course).

Once we have a final state I would update the index page (
http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can be
found via links and make some announcements.

Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:


Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with builds,
testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels offend. This was
not my intension or to ignore the situation.

I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the users
(tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high number this will
be not easy. And take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)

Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence the
next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.

Best regards

Marcus



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Martin Srebotnjak]

Wouldn't this table look much better, if it was only one?
And if the tested/release versions cells would have a green background
indicating these are the ones that are green-state in QA?

It confuses user if she finds her language in the first table but not the OS
she looked for (yeah, it is stated in the above text, but mostly people
won't read it).

Lp, m.

2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 

> Hi all,
>
> as an alternative I've created a langpack website with all files listed in
> 2 tables:
>
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_all.html
>
> Maybe we can agree on this as commpromise?
>
> Best regards
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Marcus Lange wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
>> websites to ease the download of RC builds:
>>
>> http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
>> http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html
>>
>> Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not
>> easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)
>>
>> Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look like.
>> It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are already released
>> have to be deleted from here, of course).
>>
>> Once we have a final state I would update the index page (
>> http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can be
>> found via links and make some announcements.
>>
>> Please tell me what you think about this.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>> Marcus Lange wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with builds,
>>> testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels offend. This was
>>> not my intension or to ignore the situation.
>>>
>>> I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the users
>>> (tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high number this will
>>> be not easy. And take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
>>> of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)
>>>
>>> Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence the
>>> next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
>
>

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Hi Ankit,

in the draft websites I've deleted the gu-IN entry.

In order to cancel any new build and to document this work please file 
an issue and assign it to Ivo Hinkelmann (ihi). Tell him to make sure 
that no translation will be lost and to compare the gu and gu-IN files:


http://www.openoffice.org/issues/enter_bug.cgi?component=l10n

Thanks

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Ankit Patel wrote:

Thanks for the update.

Could you please remove Gujarati (gu-IN)? because there is only one 
Gujarati language.


sure, so we should also cancel the gu-IN build at all? It would be build 
again for 3.2.0.


Best regards

Marcus




--- On Mon, 2/11/09, Marcus Lange  wrote:


From: Marcus Lange 
Subject: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org, relea...@openoffice.org
Date: Monday, 2 November, 2009, 4:37 PM
Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have
created the following websites to ease the download of RC
builds:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are
correct. It's not easy to find the correct wording for so
many, so please bear with me. ;-)

Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it
could look like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all
builds that are already released have to be deleted from
here, of course).

Once we have a final state I would update the index page
(http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new
websites can be found via links and make some
announcements.

Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many

differences with builds, testing and NL communities. So, I'm
sorry if anyone feels offend. This was not my intension or
to ignore the situation.

I'll think about what could be done to provide the

builds to the users (tested or not, released or not).
Because it's a very high number this will be not easy. And
take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)

Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early

before my absence the next week. Therefore please don't
expect to have a fast solution.

Best regards

Marcus



Ankit Patel wrote:

+1 to the discussion.

Having a download page for all localized

OpenOffice.org language packs where two different
categories, one for "supported & tested" versions of
language packs and another for "beta & untested though
translated" versions of language packs, listed would solve
the matter I believe.

--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde 

wrote:

From: Mechtilde 
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for

downloading language packs

To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
Hello,

Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:

Hi all,

Also, just out of my curiosity, can you

list recent

examples when a

fully localized national sdf with gsicheck

passed

successfully (no

errors nor warnings) did not work as

expected (like

crashed etc.)?

Yes, we have

E.g. the Polish Win version didn't start after

installing.

The goal of the NL version tests should be

that it is

usable for the
normal user and didn't have severe bugs which

are not in

the EN version.

It is not the goal that the NL version has to

be better

than the EN version.

Finally - as these tests are already

automatic in many

ways - could

not this process be automatized even

further, so that

with any RC

build the tests would be made

automatically by OOo

servers for all

available languages and the teams should

only go

through visual

(screenshots) and text results neatly

organized and

published on the

website (like a 3-5 minute job) and vote

either YES or

NO at the end?

The only prerequisite for teams would be

to fully

localize the tests

(another po file in the tree and in

Pootle) used by

this system.

The automatic tests cannot provide you for

such things like

described
above. But they can easy detect by some manual

tests

Regards

Mechtilde



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Martin Srebotnjak]

Hi, I think this is better.

Why are the untested builds marked as RC2? I mean, you already divided the
tested/approved and untested builds into two tables, why make users wonder
if this RC2 might mean this is not really 3.1.1 (or whatever the latest
version is)?

Yes, they are not released so they remain release candidates, but actually
the actual code is same as released version. I think this degrades the
second table and makes some users wonder if this is the right place to
download builds from.

Also, my two-cent suggestions:
A) make the preceding text in the top of the page shorter, more to the
point, so the user reads the really relevant things, and the tables begin
sooner;
Example: you have two similar sentences/passages that could probably be
merged into one or one could be shortened because of the other:
1) "A language pack contains only resource files for a specific language and
platform to show, e.g., menus and dialogs in your language. If available the
help content is also translated."
2) It is possible that not all elements of the user interface (e.g., menues
and dialogs) or the help topics are localized and therefore shown in English
as default language.

B) the sections and shortcuts to both tables should be renamed to something
more meaningful:
1) for the first section "OOo 3.1.x QA-approved language packs" ; the
wording "and older" makes one wonder if they are obsolete; 3.1.x says it
all, the latest available version is displayed;
2) for the second section I suggest "OOo 3.1.1 untested language packs";

C) the "Linux 32-bit RPM" header and "Linux 32-bit DEB" header in the second
table can be spanned together (span="2" or whatever) into one
"Linux 32-bit" because every link then states "deb" or "rpm"; same goes for
the Linux 64-bit headers, that can become one;

D ) sentence "For production, use the builds from the first table." is
funny; if I want Slovenian, how can I use the first table? Will I download
Serbian instead? I mean ... The preceding sentences already say it all: "*The
software offered in the second table is not recommended for production
deployment. Use on own risk.*"

Lp, m.

2009/11/2 Marcus Lange 

> Hi all,
>
> as an alternative I've created a langpack website with all files listed in
> 2 tables:
>
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_all.html
>
> Maybe we can agree on this as commpromise?
>
> Best regards
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Marcus Lange wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
>> websites to ease the download of RC builds:
>>
>> http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
>> http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html
>>
>> Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not
>> easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)
>>
>> Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look like.
>> It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are already released
>> have to be deleted from here, of course).
>>
>> Once we have a final state I would update the index page (
>> http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can be
>> found via links and make some announcements.
>>
>> Please tell me what you think about this.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>> Marcus Lange wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with builds,
>>> testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels offend. This was
>>> not my intension or to ignore the situation.
>>>
>>> I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the users
>>> (tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high number this will
>>> be not easy. And take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
>>> of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)
>>>
>>> Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence the
>>> next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
>
>

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Hi all,

as an alternative I've created a langpack website with all files listed 
in 2 tables:


http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_all.html

Maybe we can agree on this as commpromise?

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the 
following websites to ease the download of RC builds:


http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not 
easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)


Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look 
like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are already 
released have to be deleted from here, of course).


Once we have a final state I would update the index page 
(http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can be 
found via links and make some announcements.


Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with builds, 
testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels offend. This 
was not my intension or to ignore the situation.


I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the users 
(tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high number this 
will be not easy. And take into account that someone has to maintain 
this monster of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)


Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence 
the next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.


Best regards

Marcus



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Ain Vagula]

Interesting, I have several years UI translation between 99-100% and
Help over 90 and always stated it when submitting translations. Though
I havent seen full builds exept pre-last release when I asked Ivo to
make a build for win32.

ain

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 18:11, Joost Andrae  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> IMHO nobody has said this. ;-) We are doing full install sets when the
>> L10N has reached 75 or 80 %. Langpacks are always done.
>
> Sun Hamburg team is doing full builds if
>
> at least 80% UI has been translated and at least 80% help content has been
> translated
>
> Sun Hamburg team is building language packs if
>
> at least 80% UI has been translated
>
> The percentage about current translation status is collected after l10n
> teams submitted their translations. I'll gather the current status from Ivo
> Hinkelmann and from Frank Mau right after the OpenOffice.org conference.
>
>
> Kind regards, Joost
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Joost Andrae]

Hi,

IMHO nobody has said this. ;-) We are doing full install sets when the 
L10N has reached 75 or 80 %. Langpacks are always done.


Sun Hamburg team is doing full builds if

at least 80% UI has been translated and at least 80% help content has 
been translated


Sun Hamburg team is building language packs if

at least 80% UI has been translated

The percentage about current translation status is collected after l10n 
teams submitted their translations. I'll gather the current status from 
Ivo Hinkelmann and from Frank Mau right after the OpenOffice.org conference.



Kind regards, Joost

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Martin Srebotnjak wrote:

Hi Martin,


maybe the verified builds would get a green check mark icon, and the others
a red question mark icon? There should also be a legend stating that builds
with the green check mark are supported and verified, whereas the others
might not work as expected. That being said, they can all be put on one
single page. If I understand correctly some of the Sun builds (the A-list
ones) are even not fully (100%) translated? If that is so (sorry, if I
misread some of the posts on this list), those builds are not better as
Slovenian ones, that are 100% translated since 2.0 or even before...


IMHO nobody has said this. ;-) We are doing full install sets when the 
L10N has reached 75 or 80 %. Langpacks are always done.



Maybe the page could be made more readable if it is not in the tabular view?
Remember also, not all platforms are QAed for some languages!


Which makes it more complex IMHO. ;-(


One solution is to use a language selector and then an OS selector (the OS
selector would update itself upon language selection:
A- if a build does not exist it would say "no build available"
B- otherwise it would display a string: "status-icon OS-identifier
(OOo-version, size)" like this (imagine x icon graphically, I cannot draw in
text here): "x Linux 64-bit RPM (3.1.1, 95 Mb)", where x is a small icon
representing either a check or question mark.


We have already a selector for the JRE builds. Already today we have 
exception where this does not apply (platforms for that no such build is 
provided, e.g., Mac OS and Linux DEB). Introducing 2 more selectors 
would be not good.


Ah, or do you mean a selection via 2-3 drop-down listboxes? This could 
be better. But even this "magic" has to be created and for this we have 
very limited time. Creating these websites in general is OK. But every 
magic done via JavaScript needs much more time as it has to be invented 
from scratch.



Very much like the main ooo page link to downloads (autorecognition of your
language and OS), but with more options and in a very clear, simple way,
stating clearly that some build might not be fully localized and/or tested.


Normally everything (version, platform, language) should work with our 
one-click-download link. But just for problems the user can (has to) 
select the appropriate build from the the other.html.



Same goes for langpacks.


@all:
Does anything speak against a try with the current setup for the current 
3.1.1 release?


Then we can see what could be improved until 3.2.0. And with the 3.2.0 
release we can try to collect the experiences and to improve the 
websites to get it perfect.


Best regards

Marcus

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Rimas Kudelis wrote:

Hi Rimas,


OK, with the hint of "Untested" it could work. I've to play with this
setup.

I tried to start with this but I still think we should not mix stable
and unstable builds together:

- even so all builds for Mac OS PPC (which are done by Maho) have to be
integrsted, currently there is no process for this and doing it
hand-by-hand is a mess


Oh right. But I think that's just the same problem as with Linux Itanium
and PPC builds. Untested builds could simply not be listed in this column.


it's not the same problem, because we have to insert the links by hand 
as it is not on the common mirror system. Doing this for install and 
langpack builds is, ahm, a lot of work as there is no automatic process.



- what do we do with stable releases that are older than the current RC?
E.g.:

Mac OS X PPC for en-US: 2.4.0 is the latest stable release and 3.1.1
RC2 is the most recent one. Both cannot be listed in a mixed table.


yeah, that's where I messed up with my table I'll employ ascii art
to illustrate my idea. Please switch to a monospace font:

+---++--+--+
+--+
| Language | Latest | Arch 1 | Arch 2 | ... | Arch n |
+---++--+--+
+--+
..
+---++--+--+
+--+
| Lithuanian Lietuvių | 3.1.1 | Download | Tested (3.1.0) | ... | Tested
(3.0.1) |
| | | | Untested (3.1.1) | | Untested (3.1.1) |
+---++--+--+
+--+
..


As you see, both versions can obviously be listed, and that's exactly
what I propose.


OK, but this would be a complexity that nobody wants to maintain.


And here's what could be done to save some horizontal space:
1) the "Latest Release" column could be removed;
2) Columns like "Linux 32-bit RPM" and "Linux 32-bit DEB" could be
merged, into one, and provide links to both DEB and RPM versions in the
same fashion as above (other merge criterias could be used too).


This would be an general idea that could be tested.


So, I still think separated tables and websites are the best to guide
the users to the appropriate files. Then it's just a question of how
to make them available and visible in the best way.


I'm OK with separate tables. But I'd prefer to see them all on the same
page.


I'm sorry but I'm still not convinced that an all-in-wonder solution is 
the best. Please keep in mind that someone has to maintain this all. And 
the complexity is already today reached.


Best regards

Marcus



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Rimas Kudelis]

Hi again,

>> thanks for your work! :) I have a few notes though. Or basically, maybe
>> it's just one note.
>>
>> How visible will those builds be? I think we've agreed that they should
>
> I haven't seen the agreement. In which mail was it?

I think this whole thread (or at least the sub-thread) is about this.

>> be visible, and I'm not so sure hiding them behind Download -> Get More
>> Platforms and Languages -> Developer Snapshots -> Fourth Link  makes
>> them visible.
>
> this will be the start, yes. But I don't think we need several link
> level. I can put it directly on "http://download.openoffice.org"; and
> "http://download.openoffice.org/next";.

that would be cool.



> So, just to be sure. Do you agree to make the all install and all
> langpack builds available in 2 seaparate websites? You don't want to
> have every build and file on one website, right?
>
> At least me not as it would be a monster of table. ;-)

I agree. Though like I said, there could be more than one table on the
page (two? four?), and the tables with untested builds and langpacks
could be hidden by default.

Rimas

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Ankit Patel wrote:

Thanks for the update.

Could you please remove Gujarati (gu-IN)? because there is only one Gujarati 
language.


sure, so we should also cancel the gu-IN build at all? It would be build 
again for 3.2.0.


Best regards

Marcus




--- On Mon, 2/11/09, Marcus Lange  wrote:


From: Marcus Lange 
Subject: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org, relea...@openoffice.org
Date: Monday, 2 November, 2009, 4:37 PM
Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have
created the following websites to ease the download of RC
builds:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are
correct. It's not easy to find the correct wording for so
many, so please bear with me. ;-)

Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it
could look like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all
builds that are already released have to be deleted from
here, of course).

Once we have a final state I would update the index page
(http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new
websites can be found via links and make some
announcements.

Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many

differences with builds, testing and NL communities. So, I'm
sorry if anyone feels offend. This was not my intension or
to ignore the situation.

I'll think about what could be done to provide the

builds to the users (tested or not, released or not).
Because it's a very high number this will be not easy. And
take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)

Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early

before my absence the next week. Therefore please don't
expect to have a fast solution.

Best regards

Marcus



Ankit Patel wrote:

+1 to the discussion.

Having a download page for all localized

OpenOffice.org language packs where two different
categories, one for "supported & tested" versions of
language packs and another for "beta & untested though
translated" versions of language packs, listed would solve
the matter I believe.

--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde 

wrote:

From: Mechtilde 
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for

downloading language packs

To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
Hello,

Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:

Hi all,

Also, just out of my curiosity, can you

list recent

examples when a

fully localized national sdf with gsicheck

passed

successfully (no

errors nor warnings) did not work as

expected (like

crashed etc.)?

Yes, we have

E.g. the Polish Win version didn't start after

installing.

The goal of the NL version tests should be

that it is

usable for the
normal user and didn't have severe bugs which

are not in

the EN version.

It is not the goal that the NL version has to

be better

than the EN version.

Finally - as these tests are already

automatic in many

ways - could

not this process be automatized even

further, so that

with any RC

build the tests would be made

automatically by OOo

servers for all

available languages and the teams should

only go

through visual

(screenshots) and text results neatly

organized and

published on the

website (like a 3-5 minute job) and vote

either YES or

NO at the end?

The only prerequisite for teams would be

to fully

localize the tests

(another po file in the tree and in

Pootle) used by

this system.

The automatic tests cannot provide you for

such things like

described
above. But they can easy detect by some manual

tests

Regards

Mechtilde



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Rimas Kudelis]

2009.11.02 15:52, Marcus Lange rašė:
> Marcus Lange wrote:
>>> I would propose to merge the two pages you created with main
>>> http://download.openoffice.org/other.html and
>>> http://download.openoffice.org/langpack.html respectively.
>>
>> I've tried this but don't liked it because IMHO this is too much
>> content for a single page.
>>
>>> Untested builds could be listed in the same table as tested builds, or
>>> in a new one. In case of former, the resulting download table could
>>> look
>>> something like this:

Sorry, I forgot to send that mail as HTML, so it went all crappy...

>> OK, with the hint of "Untested" it could work. I've to play with this
>> setup.
>
> I tried to start with this but I still think we should not mix stable
> and unstable builds together:
>
> - builds for the platforms Itanium and Linux PPC (not done by Sun) have
> just an en-US, all other languages would remain empty in the column.

All languages in http://download.openoffice.org/other.html have that
column anyway. I don't think it's a big deal.

> - even so all builds for Mac OS PPC (which are done by Maho) have to be
> integrsted, currently there is no process for this and doing it
> hand-by-hand is a mess

Oh right. But I think that's just the same problem as with Linux Itanium
and PPC builds. Untested builds could simply not be listed in this column.

> - what do we do with stable releases that are older than the current RC?
> E.g.:
>
> Mac OS X PPC for en-US: 2.4.0 is the latest stable release and 3.1.1
> RC2 is the most recent one. Both cannot be listed in a mixed table.

yeah, that's where I messed up with my table I'll employ ascii art
to illustrate my idea. Please switch to a monospace font:

+---++--+--+
+--+
| Language | Latest | Arch 1 | Arch 2 | ... | Arch n |
+---++--+--+
+--+
...
+---++--+--+
+--+
| Lithuanian Lietuvių | 3.1.1 | Download | Tested (3.1.0) | ... | Tested
(3.0.1) |
| | | | Untested (3.1.1) | | Untested (3.1.1) |
+---++--+--+
+--+
...


As you see, both versions can obviously be listed, and that's exactly
what I propose.

And here's what could be done to save some horizontal space:
1) the "Latest Release" column could be removed;
2) Columns like "Linux 32-bit RPM" and "Linux 32-bit DEB" could be
merged, into one, and provide links to both DEB and RPM versions in the
same fashion as above (other merge criterias could be used too).

> So, I still think separated tables and websites are the best to guide
> the users to the appropriate files. Then it's just a question of how
> to make them available and visible in the best way.

I'm OK with separate tables. But I'd prefer to see them all on the same
page.

Rimas

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Ankit Patel]

Hi Marcus,

Thanks for the update.

Could you please remove Gujarati (gu-IN)? because there is only one Gujarati 
language.

Thanks!
Ankit

--- On Mon, 2/11/09, Marcus Lange  wrote:

> From: Marcus Lange 
> Subject: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs
> To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org, relea...@openoffice.org
> Date: Monday, 2 November, 2009, 4:37 PM
> Hi all,
> 
> as promised I thought about a new structure and have
> created the following websites to ease the download of RC
> builds:
> 
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html
> 
> Please have a look if the names of the languages are
> correct. It's not easy to find the correct wording for so
> many, so please bear with me. ;-)
> 
> Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it
> could look like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all
> builds that are already released have to be deleted from
> here, of course).
> 
> Once we have a final state I would update the index page
> (http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new
> websites can be found via links and make some
> announcements.
> 
> Please tell me what you think about this.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
> Marcus Lange wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I think I haven't taken into account the many
> differences with builds, testing and NL communities. So, I'm
> sorry if anyone feels offend. This was not my intension or
> to ignore the situation.
> > 
> > I'll think about what could be done to provide the
> builds to the users (tested or not, released or not).
> Because it's a very high number this will be not easy. And
> take into account that someone has to maintain this monster
> of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)
> > 
> > Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early
> before my absence the next week. Therefore please don't
> expect to have a fast solution.
> > 
> > Best regards
> > 
> > Marcus
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Ankit Patel wrote:
> >> +1 to the discussion.
> >> 
> >> Having a download page for all localized
> OpenOffice.org language packs where two different
> categories, one for "supported & tested" versions of
> language packs and another for "beta & untested though
> translated" versions of language packs, listed would solve
> the matter I believe.
> >> 
> >> --- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde 
> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> From: Mechtilde 
> >>> Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for
> downloading language packs
> >>> To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
> >>> Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
> >>> Hello,
> >>> 
> >>> Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:
>  Hi all,
>  
>  Also, just out of my curiosity, can you
> list recent
> >>> examples when a
>  fully localized national sdf with gsicheck
> passed
> >>> successfully (no
>  errors nor warnings) did not work as
> expected (like
> >>> crashed etc.)?
> >>> 
> >>> Yes, we have
> >>> 
> >>> E.g. the Polish Win version didn't start after
> installing.
> >>> 
> >>> The goal of the NL version tests should be
> that it is
> >>> usable for the
> >>> normal user and didn't have severe bugs which
> are not in
> >>> the EN version.
> >>> 
> >>> It is not the goal that the NL version has to
> be better
> >>> than the EN version.
>  Finally - as these tests are already
> automatic in many
> >>> ways - could
>  not this process be automatized even
> further, so that
> >>> with any RC
>  build the tests would be made
> automatically by OOo
> >>> servers for all
>  available languages and the teams should
> only go
> >>> through visual
>  (screenshots) and text results neatly
> organized and
> >>> published on the
>  website (like a 3-5 minute job) and vote
> either YES or
> >>> NO at the end?
>  The only prerequisite for teams would be
> to fully
> >>> localize the tests
>  (another po file in the tree and in
> Pootle) used by
> >>> this system.
> >>> 
> >>> The automatic tests cannot provide you for
> such things like
> >>> described
> >>> above. But they can easy detect by some manual
> tests
> >>> 
> >>> Regards
> >>> 
> >>> Mechtilde
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
> 
> 


  Yahoo! India has a new look. Take a sneak peek http://in.yahoo.com/trynew

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Martin Srebotnjak]

Hello,

maybe the verified builds would get a green check mark icon, and the others
a red question mark icon? There should also be a legend stating that builds
with the green check mark are supported and verified, whereas the others
might not work as expected. That being said, they can all be put on one
single page. If I understand correctly some of the Sun builds (the A-list
ones) are even not fully (100%) translated? If that is so (sorry, if I
misread some of the posts on this list), those builds are not better as
Slovenian ones, that are 100% translated since 2.0 or even before...

Maybe the page could be made more readable if it is not in the tabular view?
Remember also, not all platforms are QAed for some languages!

One solution is to use a language selector and then an OS selector (the OS
selector would update itself upon language selection:
A- if a build does not exist it would say "no build available"
B- otherwise it would display a string: "status-icon OS-identifier
(OOo-version, size)" like this (imagine x icon graphically, I cannot draw in
text here): "x Linux 64-bit RPM (3.1.1, 95 Mb)", where x is a small icon
representing either a check or question mark.

Very much like the main ooo page link to downloads (autorecognition of your
language and OS), but with more options and in a very clear, simple way,
stating clearly that some build might not be fully localized and/or tested.

Same goes for langpacks.

Lp, m.

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Marcus Lange wrote:

I would propose to merge the two pages you created with main
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html and
http://download.openoffice.org/langpack.html respectively.


I've tried this but don't liked it because IMHO this is too much content 
for a single page.



Untested builds could be listed in the same table as tested builds, or
in a new one. In case of former, the resulting download table could look
something like this:


OK, with the hint of "Untested" it could work. I've to play with this 
setup.


I tried to start with this but I still think we should not mix stable 
and unstable builds together:


- builds for the platforms Itanium and Linux PPC (not done by Sun) have
  just an en-US, all other languages would remain empty in the column.
- even so all builds for Mac OS PPC (which are done by Maho) have to be
  integrsted, currently there is no process for this and doing it
  hand-by-hand is a mess
- what do we do with stable releases that are older than the current RC?
  E.g.:

  Mac OS X PPC for en-US: 2.4.0 is the latest stable release and 3.1.1
  RC2 is the most recent one. Both cannot be listed in a mixed table.

So, I still think separated tables and websites are the best to guide 
the users to the appropriate files. Then it's just a question of how to 
make them available and visible in the best way.


Best regards

Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

[l10n-dev] Re: [releases] Re: [l10n-dev] New home for downloading language packs

[Christian Lohmaier]

Hi Marcus, *,

not sure why this slipped my radar, but still:

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Marcus Lange  wrote:
> Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Marcus Lange 
>> wrote:
>
> if there wouldn't be a QA for langpacks, then they wouldn't get released. Of
> course not every NL community is testing all files but fact is that they get
> tested and released in general.
>
> However, using langpacks because there is no QA cannot be correct. ;-)

Not the point at all.

Number of full-builds provided by Sun: only a handful selected ones.
Number of langpacks provided by Sun: ALL.

>>> It's up to the native lang teams to test also language packs if they want
>>> to
>>> make them available for the endusers. :-)
>>
>> Don't agree with the smiley here.
>> You created the page because only "power users" are aware of mirrors.
>> But now you're giving the argument that you need to be power user to
>> use languagepacks. How does a non-power-user know about that process
>> when it is nowhere mentioned on the page?
>
> When you are able to install the full package, IMHO you are also able to
> install a langpack.

Again completely missing the point.
A) There's no full installer for the desired language
B) The desired language has not been approved yet, people didn't find
it and did select the english version instead.

So you tell them to wait until somebody did QA on the langpack to be
able to find it.

That's just mean.

>> At least add a prominent sentence like "If your language is not
>> listed, then have a look at rc directory on extended mirrors. It will
>> be only listed here when it has been approved by the corresponding
>> native-lang projects (link to the process description)
>
> This website is about released versions. I don't want to mixup with not
> released versions; even when a RC is close to it.

Then the whole page is useless IMHO.

ciao
Christian

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Rimas Kudelis wrote:

Hi Rimas,


thanks for your work! :) I have a few notes though. Or basically, maybe
it's just one note.

How visible will those builds be? I think we've agreed that they should


I haven't seen the agreement. In which mail was it?


be visible, and I'm not so sure hiding them behind Download -> Get More
Platforms and Languages -> Developer Snapshots -> Fourth Link  makes
them visible.


this will be the start, yes. But I don't think we need several link 
level. I can put it directly on "http://download.openoffice.org"; and 
"http://download.openoffice.org/next";.



I would propose to merge the two pages you created with main
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html and
http://download.openoffice.org/langpack.html respectively.


I've tried this but don't liked it because IMHO this is too much content 
for a single page.



Untested builds could be listed in the same table as tested builds, or
in a new one. In case of former, the resulting download table could look
something like this:


OK, with the hint of "Untested" it could work. I've to play with this setup.


All "Untested" items here should of course be linked. Expanding the
table like that would obviously make it taller. In order not to clutter
it, there could be a checkbox/button on the page which (un)hides
untested builds.

Thinking further, I think language pack downloads could also be
integrated into the same page in a similar fashion (they could be listed
in a separate hideable table, or in the same one). This should help the
users save a few clicks, or at least a few redirects.


Yes.

So, just to be sure. Do you agree to make the all install and all 
langpack builds available in 2 seaparate websites? You don't want to 
have every build and file on one website, right?


At least me not as it would be a monster of table. ;-)

Best regards

Marcus




2009.11.02 13:07, Marcus Lange ras(e.:

Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the
following websites to ease the download of RC builds:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not
easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)

Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look
like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are
already released have to be deleted from here, of course).

Once we have a final state I would update the index page
(http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can
be found via links and make some announcements.

Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with
builds, testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels
offend. This was not my intension or to ignore the situation.

I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the
users (tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high
number this will be not easy. And take into account that someone has
to maintain this monster of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)

Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence
the next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.

Best regards

Marcus



Ankit Patel wrote:

+1 to the discussion.

Having a download page for all localized OpenOffice.org language
packs where two different categories, one for "supported & tested"
versions of language packs and another for "beta & untested though
translated" versions of language packs, listed would solve the
matter I believe.

--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde  wrote:


From: Mechtilde 
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
Hello,

Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:

Hi all,

Also, just out of my curiosity, can you list recent

examples when a

fully localized national sdf with gsicheck passed

successfully (no

errors nor warnings) did not work as expected (like

crashed etc.)?

Yes, we have

E.g. the Polish Win version didn't start after installing.

The goal of the NL version tests should be that it is
usable for the
normal user and didn't have severe bugs which are not in
the EN version.

It is not the goal that the NL version has to be better
than the EN version.

Finally - as these tests are already automatic in many

ways - could

not this process be automatized even further, so that

with any RC

build the tests would be made automatically by OOo

servers for all

available languages and the teams should only go

through visual

(screenshots) and text results neatly organized and

published on the

website (like a 3-5 minute job) and vote either YES or

NO at the end?

The only prerequisite for teams would be to fully

localize the tests

(another po file in the tree and in Pootle) use

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Martin Srebotnjak wrote:

Hi Martin,


as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
websites to ease the download of RC builds:

http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html


The first sentence on this page mentions langpacks, although the page
actually lists full localized packages:
"The table below provides download links of the latest RC of
OpenOffice.org 3.1.1 Language Packs for a specific language and
platform."


fixed


This page also features a link to a setup guide that does not work:
http://documentation.openoffice.org/setup_guide2/2.x/SETUP_GUIDE.pdf

Unfortunately setup guide for 3.x is still not finished so I wonder if
it is wise to point to an 2.x setup guide, especially for OS X etc. If
so, the link should distinguish between to A4 and US letter versions
or point directly to A4 version.

Also, maybe it would be better to link to the current development
version of 3.x setup guide, if authors allow so:
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102393
It is probably far more accurate than the 2.x guide.


is this document somewhere listed? Or only in this issue? I cannot find 
it here, e.g.:

http://documentation.openoffice.org/setup_guide2

I will leave it out as long as it is not available at all but integrate 
it as soon as it is available ina  better way.


Best regards

Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Rimas Kudelis]

Hi Marcus,

thanks for your work! :) I have a few notes though. Or basically, maybe
it's just one note.

How visible will those builds be? I think we've agreed that they should
be visible, and I'm not so sure hiding them behind Download -> Get More
Platforms and Languages -> Developer Snapshots -> Fourth Link  makes
them visible.

I would propose to merge the two pages you created with main
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html and
http://download.openoffice.org/langpack.html respectively.

Untested builds could be listed in the same table as tested builds, or
in a new one. In case of former, the resulting download table could look
something like this:

Korean  ??? 3.1.1   Download

Download

Download

Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)
Untested
(3.1.1) Tested 3.1.0

Untested (3.1.1)
Untested (3.1.1)Download

Untested (3.1.1)
Kurdish Kurdî   3.1.0   Tested (3.1.0)

Untested (3.1.1)
Untested (3.1.1)
Untested (3.1.1)
Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)
Untested
(3.1.1) Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)Untested 
(3.1.1)Untested
(3.1.1)
Lithuanian  Lietuviu;   3.1.1   Download

Tested (3.1.0)

Untested (3.1.1)
Tested (3.1.0)

Untested (3.1.1)
Tested (3.1.0)

Untested (3.1.1)
Download

Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)Download

Tested (3.0.1)

Untested (3.1.1)
Untested (3.1.1)Untested (3.1.1)


All "Untested" items here should of course be linked. Expanding the
table like that would obviously make it taller. In order not to clutter
it, there could be a checkbox/button on the page which (un)hides
untested builds.

Thinking further, I think language pack downloads could also be
integrated into the same page in a similar fashion (they could be listed
in a separate hideable table, or in the same one). This should help the
users save a few clicks, or at least a few redirects.

Regards,

Rimas

2009.11.02 13:07, Marcus Lange ras(e.:
> Hi all,
>
> as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the
> following websites to ease the download of RC builds:
>
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html
>
> Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not
> easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)
>
> Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look
> like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are
> already released have to be deleted from here, of course).
>
> Once we have a final state I would update the index page
> (http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can
> be found via links and make some announcements.
>
> Please tell me what you think about this.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Best regards
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Marcus Lange wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with
>> builds, testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels
>> offend. This was not my intension or to ignore the situation.
>>
>> I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the
>> users (tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high
>> number this will be not easy. And take into account that someone has
>> to maintain this monster of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)
>>
>> Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence
>> the next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>

Re: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Martin Srebotnjak]

2009/11/2 Marcus Lange :
> Hi all,

Hello,

> as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
> websites to ease the download of RC builds:
>
> http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html

The first sentence on this page mentions langpacks, although the page
actually lists full localized packages:
"The table below provides download links of the latest RC of
OpenOffice.org 3.1.1 Language Packs for a specific language and
platform."

This page also features a link to a setup guide that does not work:
http://documentation.openoffice.org/setup_guide2/2.x/SETUP_GUIDE.pdf

Unfortunately setup guide for 3.x is still not finished so I wonder if
it is wise to point to an 2.x setup guide, especially for OS X etc. If
so, the link should distinguish between to A4 and US letter versions
or point directly to A4 version.

Also, maybe it would be better to link to the current development
version of 3.x setup guide, if authors allow so:
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102393
It is probably far more accurate than the 2.x guide.

Lp, m.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org

[l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs

[Marcus Lange]

Hi all,

as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the 
following websites to ease the download of RC builds:


http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_rc.html

Please have a look if the names of the languages are correct. It's not 
easy to find the correct wording for so many, so please bear with me. ;-)


Keep in mind that this is just a test to show you how it could look 
like. It's not yet the final version (e.g., all builds that are already 
released have to be deleted from here, of course).


Once we have a final state I would update the index page 
(http://download.openoffice.org/next), so that both new websites can be 
found via links and make some announcements.


Please tell me what you think about this.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards

Marcus



Marcus Lange wrote:

Hi all,

I think I haven't taken into account the many differences with builds, 
testing and NL communities. So, I'm sorry if anyone feels offend. This 
was not my intension or to ignore the situation.


I'll think about what could be done to provide the builds to the users 
(tested or not, released or not). Because it's a very high number this 
will be not easy. And take into account that someone has to maintain 
this monster of list (7 platforms with 90+ languages). ;-)


Just wanted to take the chance to answer here early before my absence 
the next week. Therefore please don't expect to have a fast solution.


Best regards

Marcus



Ankit Patel wrote:

+1 to the discussion.

Having a download page for all localized OpenOffice.org language packs 
where two different categories, one for "supported & tested" versions 
of language packs and another for "beta & untested though translated" 
versions of language packs, listed would solve the matter I believe.


--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde  wrote:


From: Mechtilde 
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
Hello,

Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:

Hi all,

Also, just out of my curiosity, can you list recent

examples when a

fully localized national sdf with gsicheck passed

successfully (no

errors nor warnings) did not work as expected (like

crashed etc.)?

Yes, we have

E.g. the Polish Win version didn't start after installing.

The goal of the NL version tests should be that it is
usable for the
normal user and didn't have severe bugs which are not in
the EN version.

It is not the goal that the NL version has to be better
than the EN version.

Finally - as these tests are already automatic in many

ways - could

not this process be automatized even further, so that

with any RC

build the tests would be made automatically by OOo

servers for all

available languages and the teams should only go

through visual

(screenshots) and text results neatly organized and

published on the

website (like a 3-5 minute job) and vote either YES or

NO at the end?

The only prerequisite for teams would be to fully

localize the tests

(another po file in the tree and in Pootle) used by

this system.

The automatic tests cannot provide you for such things like
described
above. But they can easy detect by some manual tests

Regards

Mechtilde



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org