On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Daisy, > > On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 21:48 +0800, Ying Chun Guo wrote: > > Hi, Mark > > > > I think there is a blueprint we discussed in the Havana summit to > > separate translation domains. > > > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/log-messages-translation-domain > > > > I don't see any progress there. > > Do you have any plan to implement it? > > The translation team set the command line message as high priority, > > but log messages as low priority. > > So we want the domains can be separated. > > Given that there's been no progress on this, I suggest we take a > pragmatic approach to allow us to move forward > > - The fact that the "high priority" and "low priority" messages are > mixed together means we can't get to high levels of translations > for the high priority messages. > > - It's time we deal with this issue around high priority messages with > some urgency, even if that means hurting the ability to have low > priority messages translated. > > - In other words, we should submit patches to have the low priority > messages no longer marked for translation. > > - Once someone comes up with a solution for a separate translation > domain for low priority messages, we can go back and mark the low > priority messages for translation again. > > - This sounds like a lot of churn, but every low priority message > will need to be touched even if we come up with a solution for a > separate translation domain e.g. changing _() to l_() > > The key thing here is to have some very concrete rules about which > messages are high priority and low priority. The question is more subtle > than it seems. > What about starting with log messages are all low priority (except perhaps for the error level?). A quick grep shows these are *roughly* half of the translations. > > For example, if a Nova instance fails to boot, we include the "instance > fault" in the detailed "nova show" output. Should those fault messages > be translated? If so, tracking down all the possible error messages that > might wind up there is actually quite difficult. > > That said, I'd be happy if we erred on the side of "if we're not sure > whether it's user-visible, let's assume it's not" approach. > > Cheers, > Mark. > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev