just two small comments. have a nice weekend. Jan.
On 26 October 2012 19:43, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > Rob Weir wrote: > >> 1) release new languages via lang packs only for now >> 2) release full installs, but for only these new languages >> > > I don't see a big difference between a langpack and a full install in this > case, so I'd go for full installs, unless releasing langpacks helps in > communicating that these are "late" additions and that full installs will > come with the next release. > > > Can we really skip the release process? PO files == source, right? >> > > Yes, not exactly but quite (PO files are not taken verbatim into source, > but they are imported and influence resource files which are in the source > tree). > > > Maybe a question for legal-discuss if we're not certain. >> > > If in the end we have consensus on releasing new languages for 3.4.1 > instead of making a new release, indeed we will ask. > > > How do we want to handle this on an ongoing basis? New point release >> for every new language? Every 5 new languages? It is certainly good >> for volunteers to get the encouragement of a fast turnaround for their >> work. But this is the same for a C++ programmer. >> > > There are big differences here, that are also the reason for me to > consider releasing these new languages as soon as possible: > - A translation is often done by a team; if we can publish it immediately, > the team can the be involved in other activities like revamping the N-L > website, local promotion and so on; if we wait too much, we risk to have no > volunteers for the following release. > - Releasing a new language is totally risk-free: a new language can't > break functionality in OpenOffice, while any feature could have bugs and > needs more qualified testing. I do not agree to that statement for two reasons - a bad translations will influence the reputation of AOO in that language zone. - Wrong translation of e.g. accelerators, might not break the product technically speaking, but for sure the end-user will experience it as non-functioning. > > > In the end, I wonder whether the best solution is to get into a steady >> release cycle of quarterly releases (every 3 or 4 months)? >> > > This could be a solution too. In this case we would have the problem of > choosing what to translate (3.4 or 3.5? probably we would ask new > volunteers to focus on strings that will be in the next release, even > though they aren't frozen yet). > - I think it would be nice to give translators an early start possibility, giving them a choice of working late after freeze or taking parts now with the risk that new messages are added. In my experience the risk for changed messages are relatively low. > > Regards, > Andrea. >
