написане Sat, 05 Dec 2009 13:25:21 +0200, Yaron Shahrabani <[email protected]>:
> Why change? > Usage of Launchpad's Bazaar can extend our current working environment > and > allow us to work on the files online and get suggestion from Launchpad as > well as working directly on the PO file, Bazaar can be updated the same > way > SVN does plus adding the online editing feature, I can't see what's wrong > with that, those who would like to work in the old-fashioned way can > keep on > doing it but those who prefer moving on to launchpad can choose to do > so... > Am I right? Yes, you are almost right. But there will be no "old-fashioned" way if translations "moved" to LP (as proposed). Please understand me. I do not want to wait 5 or 11 hours to download translation. I want to see who and how changed the translation (it is impossible at the current LP). I do not want to translate 1 KiB message again and again just because someone changed just one letter in it. I want to use glossary of the translation. If the translation permission will be "Open", I do not want to ask David Planella to find the way to roll back the translations made by some guy who think that Russian words sound better in Ukrainian translation. Extend our current working environment? Please clarify. How the use of some CVS can extend the environment? Suggestions from LP? Virtaal 0.5 can query all FOSS translations in OpenTran and any translations archive that you pointed. It also can Google-translate the phrase without tags. What is the profit of LP? Well, certainly LP has advantages. Many people can take part in translation. But what prevent Ubuntu users from translation now? At least Ukrainian translation is on the LP but nobody wants to translate the last message in it (translated in upstream). If Ubuntu users want to translate Inkscape, then nobody can prevent them to translate it, I think (I am not using Ubuntu). Moreover, Rosetta claims not-imported (hosted) translations to be BSD-licensed. All Inkscape translations are marked by: # This file is distributed under the same license as the Inkscape package. Please tell me what of the following sentences holds true: 1) Inkscape will be licensed under BSD. 2) All translations will be relicensed under BSD not asking what their authors think. You think I am joking? Well, try me. http://crowdin.net/ Fully commercial tool (now in testing purposes "free") that compiled FOSS translation memories (even GPLed) and try to sell them proclaiming that: collecting Content from Crowdin.net as part of a database or other project; framing or otherwise incorporating Crowdin.net, or any portion of Crowdin.net, as part of another website or service; accessing Crowdin.net by any other way than through interfaces provided by Crowdin; is prohibited. Sic! (Now they removed their TM at my demand.) I think the next generation of such "tools" will be with Rosetta BSD translations embedded (Yes, it is legal, ladies and gentlemen!). And again, to have up-to-date template in LP, someone have to create this template. I think it will be one of the developers. So where is the benefit for the developers? They do it now, they have to do it in LP... If the abstraction layer for translation is needed, why not to use Transifex or Narro? They allow all the things (including RSS feeds) that LP does not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-translator mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-translator
