Annoucement: New translation status page is installed

Fri Jun 25 12:10:15 UTC 2004

Dear Youcef,

Youcef Rabah Rahal schrieb:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Friday 25 June 2004 12:05, Bernd Groh wrote:
>  
>
>>Youcef,
>>
>>you're kidding, right?
>>    
>>
>
>Dear Bernd,
>
>A statement like the previous one does conflict with the idea I have of a 
>constructive and professional discussion.
>
>  
>
>>>Not sure this is consistent with the rest. How do you define the 'right'
>>>terminology if there's no precise framework ? Why should someone be
>>>prevented from translation if his translations are correct yet using
>>>another terminology ?
>>>      
>>>
>>Wasn't your voice one of the loudest raising the issue of consistency?
>>Since I believe that the comments made concerning consistency are very
>>valid, I am suggesting solutions on how some of the problems can be
>>handled with the given system. If you don't think someone should be
>>prevented from doing translations that are correct, but inconsistent
>>with everything else, what exactly were you on about previously?
>>    
>>
>
>I am still defending consistency and team work. I simply say that refusing 
>access to someone who is doing _correct_ translations but with a different 
>terminology than a group who is working on the same language, is not coherent 
>with _your_ previous statements and the new system. And hence the 
>inconsistence in the system itself.
>

And you're telling me you're not kidding? I am in favour of consistency 
and teamwork, I simply favour inconsistent translations over none. I do 
not refuse someone who is doing _correct_ translations with a different 
terminology access, neither I ever will be. But if I'd see that 
maintainers put in a lot of effort to keep translations consistent, and 
one member would, even after having been reminded, not be willing to 
adapt to a commonly agreed on terminology, I'd fulfill the maintainers 
request on suspending, and if required disabling someones access. This 
is me taking the comments made about consistency issues seriously, 
nothing more. And while I do not see where I am incoherent, even if I 
would become incoherent, because I listen to what the community is 
saying, frankly speaking, I wouldn't even care (on a side note, you're 
not the sole speaker of the community).

>>>Yes. A translation community can indeed function very well without having
>>>an established team and/or maintainer and this is proven everyday.
>>>However, when there are teams in place, they need to be considered.
>>>      
>>>
>>Yes, and I believe they are. If a coordinator of an active community (as
>>in the group of people having the common interest of wanting to
>>translate Fedora into their language, including "newer" translators) who
>>has the support of most of the members of that language group requests
>>to be a maintainer, this request is not denied.
>>    
>>
>
>What if the members of that language are simply not subscribed to this 
>list ? ;) I sent an email to i18n at redhat.com 2 days ago and didn't get any 
>answer about my application to be a maintainer.
>

Well, maybe the people making these decisions haven't decided yet? Btw, 
I have received more emails from arabic speaking members not supporting 
you being the maintainer of all modules than I have received emails in 
support of you. I invite these people to send you an email directly, or 
state their opinion on list, but even if they chose not to do so, their 
opinion is heard.

>>>A question: this new system has been installed after a request from the
>>>community, right ? How come many (if not all ?) people on this list are
>>>surprised ? ;) I don't remember a post on this list introducing the new
>>>system nor someone posting to request it ? Or are you referring to another
>>>'community' ?
>>>
>>>Some URLs would help. Sorry if I missed something.
>>>      
>>>
>>Please, don't you think you're going a little off track here? Is that
>>your idea of constructive criticism, or are you simply on some kind of
>>mission now? Why do you ask me? Why don't you ask the people suggesting
>>to lock files to disallow two translators from comitting at the same
>>time, since that's the main thing that's new. And I still believe their
>>reasoning to be very valid.
>>    
>>
>
>Not off track, sorry. This is a _natural_ question. You stated previously that 
>the new system was suggested by the community ? Nobody seemed to question 
>that though many of the posts (if not all) I read note that their authors are 
>rather suprised by the new system.
>

Yes, it surprised me too. But maybe the ones preferring the new system 
simply didn't have any reason to speak. People tend to voice their 
opinions more if things aren't the way they want them to be, I am 
exactly the same.

>Again, as this new system simply conflicts with what was already in place, 
>with what other projects do
>

Why is that again?

>, and with what we (as translators) have been 
>familiar with (until two days ago), I'm simply asking, when, by who, and 
>where this request was made ? What community are you referring to ? As far as 
>I know, people interested by Fedora translation (the community) are 
>subscribed to this list, yet I never read any reference about this subject. 
>Should we be subscribed to some other list ?
>

Well, we have individual language lists too, all of which are part of 
Fedora. As far as I remember came most requests out of the french and 
brazilian-portuguese communities, is that right? Anyone?

And really, most emails of critique weren't really criticizing the new 
system, the new system merely made people aware again that everyone can 
commit. But that's not really a fault of the new system, or is it now?

>It shouldn't take long to answer these questions. A URL should not be hard to 
>paste. If you want me to accept something, please explain it to me first... 
>I'm not asking more than how things really happened. If I missed something 
>than please remind me by pointing me to the right place.
>

Ok, can somebody please do that? Please? :)

>PS: You can add that to _constructive critisism_ of communication among the 
>Fedora community. If you call for critics, but you can't accept them, then, 
>well...
>

Why, oh why, is your "criticism" the only one I can't accept? In 
response to other emails, I even said, and I quote: "I simply felt it 
was the right thing to do. I could have been wrong.".

Regards,
Bernd

>Best regards,
>
>- -- 
>Youcef R. Rahal
>Arabeyes.org
>http://www.arabeyes.org/~rahal
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
>
>iD8DBQFA3AHsHDRR6Cd0eSYRAuMoAJ9wwK/CxQfK8dOfm084qS+cxzKLCwCggj9i
>iJV9iABVHr/St/xS40WNJvk=
>=/A5A
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>--
>Fedora-trans-list mailing list
>Fedora-trans-list at redhat.com
>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-trans-list
>  
>

-- 
Dr. Bernd R. Groh                       Phone : +61 7 3514 8114
Software Engineer (Localization)        Fax   : +61 7 3514 8199
Red Hat Asia-Pacific                    Mobile: +61 403 851 269
Disclaimer: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer/