Oh, and one thing I've forgotten to metion.
I think XMPP (Jabber) is a good candidate for RPC. Why?
1. The protocol is already XML based, and XML can be nested.
2. It would allow triggered updates, where master server would
notify slave servers of a new or fuzzy string needing
translation, so
Gasper,
This is great stuff. Please let us talk more about it in July, after
your exams.
Zejn Gasper wrote:
>Indexing would be split; statistics, translation states and similar metadata
>would go into relational database for faster access. But for the PO/XLIFF
>files, I think I'd somehow rath
Hi all,
I've been occupied a little lately and only passively reading the list. I may
be a little bit too technical, but that's intentionally. ;)
There are some things I would like to add to this discussion:
Not only databases, file systems can also scale, eg. you can set up a NFS
cluster, so
On 6/9/06, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, my understanding is that the main intent behind the
> "separate backend from frontend" work is to allow further changes in
> implementations without redesigning the whole thing.
>
> In short, if a correct API is implemented for sto
Hi Aigars,
I think that this discussion is very important.
We need to ensure that Pootle is capable of handling the large amounts
of information that Debian needs, which is probably not the problem, but
it must also handle all the processes that Debian needs. The solution
might be either on fi
Quoting Aigars Mahinovs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I personally feel strongly that move to storing everything in a
> database is long overdue in Pootle, but I am very cautionos about the
> move because of respect to development decisions that Pootle
> developers made before for reasons that I do not kn
I personally feel strongly that move to storing everything in a
database is long overdue in Pootle, but I am very cautionos about the
move because of respect to development decisions that Pootle
developers made before for reasons that I do not know at this point.
But I would really like these reaso
As for specific technology - jToolkit (that we already use) has supportfor many databases so we'll probably use that functionality so that we
don't become tied to any specific one.May is better to use the python binding of libgda; it supports may databases backends and is a GNU implementation (now
On Do, 2006-06-08 at 00:17 +0300, Gintautas Miliauskas wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi
There are a lot of things to reply to. I've CC'd the developers list
(this is the users list).
Hopefully the other people will respond as well to give a more thorough
reply.
> > As the others have mentioned, yes, we are d
On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 01:32 +0200, Nicolas François wrote:
> Hello Gintautas,
>
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 12:17:28AM +0300, Gintautas Miliauskas wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a strong opinion about the direction Pootle's backend should be
> > headed. I think that at the moment you have a 'loose'
On 08/06/2006, at 9:02 AM, Nicolas François wrote:
> Also, I'm not sure a Pootle server is mostly doing write operations
> (the number of write operations is probably proportionnal to the
> number of
> users).
> The CPU may be more occupied in doing fuzzy matching of strings.
> I'm not
> sure
Hello Gintautas,
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 12:17:28AM +0300, Gintautas Miliauskas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a strong opinion about the direction Pootle's backend should be
> headed. I think that at the moment you have a 'loose' system based on
> files, which is simple and transparent. However, it is
Hi,
> As the others have mentioned, yes, we are doing 2 major restructure:
>
> 1) base classing of our convertor classes and Pootle
> 2) Locking
>
> Some of this does affect backend separation.
>
> There of course is lots of work, but I understand that yours needs to
> be quite independent. We
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Might be best to run you branch from Pootle CVS on SourceForge as it
>> will allow easier syncing of your work with changes in HEAD. If you
>> feel up to migrating us to SVN lets chat.
>
> Would be good. I see things from a user point of view and,
> Might be best to run you branch from Pootle CVS on SourceForge as it
> will allow easier syncing of your work with changes in HEAD. If you
> feel up to migrating us to SVN lets chat.
Would be good. I see things from a user point of view and, indeed, SVN
is way much more convenient to work with
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 02:08 +0300, Gintautas Miliauskas wrote:
> We discussed the separation of pootle's backend from the frontend as a
> viable short-term goal. We also talked about many more things, from
> available technologies to architectural issues.
>
> Aigars promised me Subversion acce
Gintautas Miliauskas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I hope you don't mind me cross-posting to debian-i18n and
> translate-pootle; the material concerns both groups.
>
> unfortunately I am still busy with university stuff, I have a few exams
> in the coming few days, and a couple more later on, but sun's alrea
On Ma, 2006-06-05 at 02:08 +0300, Gintautas Miliauskas wrote:
> Hello,
>
Hi
...
>
> Aigars promised me Subversion access to pootle's repository where I
> could create a branch and work on it. While I don't yet have code to
> commit, I have been trying to get the gist of what you have and I w
Hello,
I hope you don't mind me cross-posting to debian-i18n and
translate-pootle; the material concerns both groups.
unfortunately I am still busy with university stuff, I have a few exams
in the coming few days, and a couple more later on, but sun's already
shining through the clouds.
We had a
19 matches
Mail list logo
