Hi! Dimitris Glezos <[email protected]>, Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:03:56 +0300:
(...) > Tao, I think you're 100% right that certain projects and translators > would prefer having a more "global" system of translation teams. > That's why projects such as GNOME, Fedora and others have such a > strong L10n community. These were the communities we had in mind when > adding the support for "Project Team Re-using/Outsourcing", giving the > choice to developers to choose this model. Additionally, for some > other upstream projects, having an upstream team might make more > sense. This seems to be quite a recurring issue, for what it's worth, since we've had this (or similar) discussion before. The support for "Project Team Re-using/Outsourcing" is surely an improvement in the current Transifex implementation, so thanks for that, but from a translation community perspective, I'm afraid it's still quite missing a point. I think that community-empowered l10n infrastructure should be built upon a paradigm that by default stress out the need for creating and/or facilitating per-translation-team-based global translation community. I believe that's the only effective way to do [community] translations in the FLOSS world. My 50 hellers, Petr Kovar _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
