OK, then it seems reasonable to leave that up to the discretion of the lead. Teams could appear at the top of the custom content and look pretty much exactly the same as they look on most of the pages now. I think if we attempt to push this concept for all translations, we'll end up out of date for the less active ones. BTW, Thomas, the German translation is a perfect example of a lead taking initiative and really getting the job done. ;) 100%- that's awesome! Unless you guys need them in the next few hours, I'll move them back in to the development tree as proposed after I get home tonight.
,Wil > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Weidner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:47 PM > To: Wil Sinclair; Simone Carletti > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [fw-general] Project Teams and Separate Mailing Lists. . . > > As team leader of the german development team I found it very handy > that > have a status for the translation members. > Which part has to be translated, which was already proof-read, to have > a > list of members, who is working on what and so on. > > Now that we have 100% translated for german I don't need it anymore, > but I > think other language leads could find it very handy. > The manual status page is sometimes not enough information. > > My 2 cents. > > Thomas > I18N and German Team Lead > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wil Sinclair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Simone Carletti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:52 PM > Subject: RE: [fw-general] Project Teams and Separate Mailing Lists. . . > > > That seems reasonable to me. I don't see any issue with maintaining > translation pages in development, but we should make sure we aren't > setting ourselves up for getting immediately out of date. As far as I > can tell, the areas that go out of date very quickly include the > current > status of the project, names of people working on the project, etc. And > even these wouldn't be an issue if there is a lead maintaining the > page, > as with the Italian and French pages. > > So how about this? We can create a standard header for each translation > so that all the information that is the same across the translations > will appear in the same place, and custom content can go beneath. If no > translation lead wants to take ownership of the page, the page will > only > contain that header, which would include stuff like the language name, > a > link to the docs on the wiki, and maybe a note that this translation is > available for someone to actively lead. All of these pages can go under > a new 'translations' page under the documentation guide > (http://framework.zend.com/wiki/display/ZFDEV/Zend+Framework+Documentat > i > on+Guide). If we find that a translation page has gotten out of date, > we > can archive the custom content and leave the header. > > Do you find the concept of a 'translation team' useful? If so, what > does > it bring us? The other project team pages seemed to bring little value > and mostly served to list the names of people who said they would help, > but were busy when it came to the actual 'helping' part. J > > > > ,Wil > > > > From: Simone Carletti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:49 AM > To: Wil Sinclair > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [fw-general] Project Teams and Separate Mailing Lists. . . > > > > Because translation activity is strictly part of Zend Framework > development and improvements, and follows an internal workflow, > including an SVN powered storage, I would suggest to think about a > translation section under development area. > > Additionally, I remember I didn't provide much credit to User Space > section when I first came across ZF framework, many months ago. I > jumped > directly to development section. > I had a look to user area just a few weeks later, when I started to get > involved into ZF development. > > This is why I think the translation section could find a better place > under the development area. > If you feel more comfortable it is possible to start with a small set > of > pages to reduce the number of outdated pages, including howto > guidelines > and other helpful information. > Then each single user (translator) could decide to use custom pages > under user area depending on custom needs. > > What do you think? > > -- Simone > > > > On Dec 17, 2007 7:33 PM, Wil Sinclair < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I would call it more of a 'update' than a 'reorganization'. The > development space had a bunch of outdated content on it that was > generally misleading and gave the wiki a somewhat abandoned feel. While > the user space can be more freeform, the development space we use for > lots of structured, important content that we'd like to keep as clear > and concise as possible. The page you mention happens to be under > project teams, which are going away as a concept, although I don't want > to take away any tools that are useful for anyone. Would you prefer a > new translation section of the development space, or would you rather > have the freedom of the user space to do pretty much whatever you want > with it? > > ,Wil > > > Talking about project teams and wiki... I saw you just moved the most > > part > > of pages under /archive group that is write protected. > > It means, for instance, we cannot edit any team or translation page, > > such as > > http://framework.zend.com/wiki/display/ARCHIVE/Italian+%28Italiano%29 > > > > Is there any wiki reorganization in action? > > > > -- Simone > > > > > > wllm wrote: > > > > > > Does anybody find the concept of project teams (as laid out here: > > > http://framework.zend.com/wiki/display/ZFDEV/Project+Teams) > > worthwhile? > > > That is to say, not just occasionally useful, but actually worth > the > > > > extra effort to maintain and the additional complexity that they > add > > to > > > the overall project? Most of the project team pages on the wiki are > > > woefully out of date at this point, and I happen to be very > skeptical > > > about any process or structure that isn't part of any critical > > workflow > > > for a project- they tend to get abandoned as soon as higher- > priority > > and > > > more immediate tasks come up- as these seem to have been. > > > Also- separate mailing lists- same question. Only 3 lists get more > > than > > > the occasional mail: general, mvc, and db. I'd venture to guess > that > > > most of us subscribe to all 3 of these, and people tend to > cross-post > > or > > > post specific questions in general if they want to make sure > everyone > > > reads them anyways. Our traffic across all mailing lists adds up to > > > about 5-10 mails per day, which IMO is a nice lively- but not > > > overwhelming- mail rate on a list. If you think that some of these > > > separate lists are useful, why and which ones? Please keep in mind > > the > > > potential confusion of those new to framework who have a question > and > > > may not know which place is best to post it or that some of these > > lists > > > are not widely read. > > > > > > Thanks for any feedback. > > > ,Wil > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Project-Teams- > and- > > Separate-Mailing-Lists.-.-.-tp14360219s16154p14370312.html > > Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > >
