Docs Successes and Needs

Paul Gampe pgampe at
Thu Jan 25 15:49:46 UTC 2007

On Friday 19 January 2007 03:49, Karsten Wade wrote:
> Sorry about the delay in responding.  Paul Frields and I collaborated
> tonight on a response, and I'll be glad to bring you up to speed.

Same here ;)

> We describe some of the needs below.  They've also been voiced in some
> recent fedora-trans-list threads by L10n Project members, but no replies
> have been seen from the L10n leadership.  

Sorry to ask, but could you point me at a url for the thread and I'll follow 

> The community created a Wiki 
> page some time ago to flesh this out.[1]

Do you mean this page? [1]

> The goal is to create a way 
> in which volunteer translators can work more fluidly with Fedora
> developers (where Fedora is the upstream source) and with documentation.

Right good goal. What would be a workflow for example?

> A continuing problem is that neither the Documentation team nor the L10n
> team is sure what, exactly, they need.  But to figure out the exact
> needs is going to require input from and discussion with the Red Hat
> teams involved.  That needs to happen in community space.

Sure.  I note the above wiki lists 20:00 UTC as a potential irc meeting time.  
That time wont work for Asia so perhaps we need to consider two meeting 

> Yes, that group said then they had no time to work on Fedora L10n
> infrastructure.  Since Fedora Infrastructure now has resources where RH
> and non-RH community can collaborate, perhaps L10n is in a better
> position to seed this upstream work.  

Good point.  

> Things needed: 
> * CVS on elvis.r.c merged over to, 

So this might be an issue as elvis.r.c holds a super-set of what we localize 
for Fedora.  Who concluded this was a requirement?

> including account migration 

I may be wrong here, but I thought the Fedora Infrastructure team was working 
on a SSO architecture.  Would it not make more sense to leverage that 

> and CLA completion by users (non-trivial). 

I am sure there is a good reason but just wanted to check why this is 
necessary? Given we are dealing with over 1000 accounts we have to do this 
via automation.  Is there an API for this?

> * Port existing Perl Web app to Python so it can be supported and
> maintained by the community.

I'm sure the community can support Perl :) This does not seem like a real 

> * Renewed vigorous and committed leadership from Translation Project
> leaders inside Red Hat, including embracing the Fedora leadership
> model.[2]

So are you saying the Fedora translation teams need to approach the Fedora 
board for official approval? We have identified community leaders for 
languages with >5 contributors are you saying each language must complete 
this process?

> > > 2.  Content from RH, licensed under our terms (OPL w/no options).
> >
> > Was there a thread discussing the selection of this license?
> This was resolved internally at Red Hat between Mark Webbink and Content
> Services.  It was done to align RHEL docs to be upstream/downstream of
> content from Fedora, so they both needed the same license[3].

Thanks, I'm reviewing the discussion with Mark now.



Paul Gampe - Red Hat, <pgampe at>

More information about the fedora-docs-list mailing list