> -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Olson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 3:30 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: PHPdoc List; Hannes Magnusson > Subject: Re: [PHP-DOC] EN-Revision comments Vs Docbook > revision attributes > > > Personally I'm unable to throw my vote towards any particular > method at this time but feel we're getting somewhere and that > this topic won't be forgotten. Ideally even more people will > weigh in with ideas, especially translators, for how best to > approach this. There are several good ideas floating around > so to summarize them (including my thoughts): > > --- > (A) The proposal with manually updated revision numbers. One > for minor, another for major. (Hannes) > > I don't see forgetfulness (which would no doubt happen from time to > time) as a solid enough reason to scrap this idea entirely > because we have a strong enough peer review to combat that. > Overall it's a nice proposal but see below. > > (B) Automatic revision increments by default, with ability to > manually disable the increment per commit. (Leonardo) > > This is my current favourite (but how best to implement?) as > it's essentially the best of both worlds. > > (C) Use the CVS commit message to designate status, and use > scripts/ tools to parse. (Jakub) > > A similar idea here is we could (in addition to B above) do > this to mark 'critical' commits in the message, and then a > tool would let translators know which files still require > these critical fixes. In fact, we may even consider 'hiding' > these pages (via the build) by showing EN/ versions until > they are in fact translated. > > (D) Have it all automatic, as done currently. (Nuno) > > Hopefully the above thoughts help ease these concerns. > > (E) ? (?) > --- > > And even though it's a good start, what we decide here won't > be the magical bullet that'll solve our translation problems. > I can't speak from experience but strongly urge all > translators to think about this entire topic and brainstorm > for methods to help better manage the translations. Is it > simply a lack of volunteer time? Or is the difficulty of > working with the manual sources the main problem? Do we need > better tools? Is file ownership ever an issue? How does > Japanese bionic man Masahiro do it all? And while we're at > it, let's ensure the following is correct and wise: > > http://doc.php.net/php/dochowto/chapter-translation.php > > And regardless of what we do here, the idea of declaring > outdated translated text as outdated (and linking to en/) via > the build system will be done. Livedocs did it, and PhD will > too. Right Hannes? ;-) > > Regards, > Philip
Hi ! Since I do not know deeply all the intricacies of CVS and PhD, I cannot opt for one of the proposals above. (C) looks too 'artificial' in my opinion. When I first joined the team as a translator it was rather difficult and it took me some time to figure out how everything works. It would be nice to make the Howto more detailed and more 'newbie oriented' if someone has the time, of course. Also in the beginning it was difficult for me to figure out the status of the entire translation. The page at http://doc.php.net/php/ro/revcheck.php showed outdated information although we made commits to the 'ro' tree. Only when I figured out how to run 'revcheck' locally I got the real picture. Is it difficult to put this script somewhere on cvs.php.net so that it always checks the latest data? These are my thoughts for now. Best regards, Simion.
