Docs Successes and Needs

[Bart Couvreur]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Posting this to fedora-trans too, to get some translators input

Thomas Canniot schreef:
> Le vendredi 05 janvier 2007 à 11:15 -0500, Paul W. Frields a écrit :
>> I should have started this thread on Wednesday but my home schedule has
>> been a bit topsy-turvy of late:
>>
>> The Docs Project has been invited to participate in the next Fedora
>> Project Board meeting.  We should be prepared to talk about the
>> successes we've had over the past two releases and what remains to be
>> done.  The way I see it, here are some starter issues.  I'd appreciate
>> plenty of input, but please keep in mind that the issues should be
>> things the Board cares about (e.g. blockers in other subprojects that we
>> haven't been able to resolve after repeated attempts, resource needs
>> that might require Real Funds -- things we can't provide by ourselves).
>>
>> Successes:
>> 1.  Best-in-the-world release notes, provided by the community.
>> 2.  Growing contributor base, including work on additional entry-level
>> to intermediate-level guides.
>> 3.  Progress toward integrating with the Fedora package universe.
>>
>> Future Predictions:
>> 1.  Possible click-thru on Wiki will allow easier contribution without
>> all the GPG+SSH+CLA+EditGroup rigamarole
>> 2.  FUDCon presence will result in major updates to available docs,
>> making it easier for new people to learn processes
>>
>> Outstanding Issues:
>> 1.  Translation Project disconnect - what do we need here in concrete
>> terms?  App rewrites and process changes?  Red Hat internal group(s)
>> originally had ownership of this, yet we've seen no progress in the past
>> months... or year(s).
>
> There are simple things that may be sufficient to help improving
> translation.
> 1. make it easy to subscribe to the project in itself. It _is_ really a
> pain to open that much of account to translate a string. That shouldn't.
> 2. do not allow people to commit as they want. New contributors (as well
> as every pieces of translation) must be read over by someone more
> experienced in the projet. A bit like extras packages are reviewed
> before being accepted. This will avoid many mistakes in the
> distribution.
> 3. better communication between developers and translators. For
> example :
> a package sees its .pot file updated. That is the responsibility to
> check regurlary for this kind of update. But developers could say on the
> translation list : i'm going to rebuild the updated software into a RPM
> package by (any date) and all translation done before that date will be
> included.
>
> That's all I'd like :)
Maybe also checkout the thread[1] on fedora-trans-list from a few
weeks ago on this very subject
>
> >From my point of view, I don't think it could be that indispensable to
> have the same webapp than Launchpad offers for translation, that is,
> translation directly from the web browser. I personally don't trust any
> web browser, their stability depending on the websites you are on.
As far as I know Launchpad will never be an option, as it's closed
source. Lately I've been wanting to look into Pootle[1], which offers
some similar functionality and is written in Python.

Maybe all this stuff on L10N should have it's own separate meeting
with the Board, as it's such a big change/challenge to get this right.
I can think of some people who would like to join that meeting then,
and we should get people from Docs and Infrastructure in that meeting
as well (just my 2 ct).

Greetings,
Bart

[1]:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2006-November/msg00035.html
[2]: http://translate.sourceforge.net/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFoLFWrbZrKtk/D5MRArMRAJ9e8wDZRv3kIrI6uGjsdjVVSSsNQACgn2Lw
/AHvW6wlqCaaBzWVYxy42s8=
=vqmR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----