On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 22:27 +0100, Dimitris Glezos wrote: > O/H Simos Xenitellis έγραψε: > > There have been some discussions on the pootle mailing list about how to > > best expand Pootle to work upstream, in the last two years. > > I think the emphasis was on getting GNOME translations work upstream. > > Hi all, and Simos thanks for the forwarded email; didn't receive it since I > was only subscribed on the translate-devel list. > > First of all, I think the work you guys are doing on Wordforge is great and > valuable for the community. Pootle and the Toolkit have proved useful in the > past for teams in which I was a member.
Thanks. Its been fun to see more people using the Toolkit for some wild ideas. > > On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 00:10 -0300, Leonardo Fontenelle wrote: > >> I couldn't understand if this project was approved or not. > >> > >> Anyway, maybe they could focus on improving Pootle on what they may > >> need. It would be much more effective than trying to reinvent the > >> wheel :) > > I'd be more than happy to extend a tool instead of writing anything from > scratch; glad Wordforge writes in Python. :) I'd really like to encourage that as we keep seeing a lot or reinvention of the wheel in the l10n domain. > A full explanation of the Fedora GSoC project can be found at [1]. > > [1]: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SummerOfCode/2007/DimitrisGlezos > > Basically, the project has two objectives: > > 1. Deploy an interface providing translation statistics for Fedora > 2. Provide a tool that enables seamless commits to upstream projects > > Of course these are not rigid and we can adapt them etc, but they are our > primary concern. No plans for online/web translations in the project's scope > but > I'd be happy for suggestions for future work! > > The first one is a simple concept, found in many projects; I particularly like > GNOME's Damned Lies approach. My recommendation would still be to use Pootle even if Damed lies is simpler. Simply because Pootle would allow easier migration to other features such as suggestions, checks, assignment, etc. My suggestion would be for this part to simply add the ability to Pootle to allow it to run in a stats only mode. > I imagine the second as a tool (Web UI with a > command-line tool) that handles *remotely-SCM-hosted* PO files for people who > have access to Fedora l10n. The (remote) project manager creates one SCM > account > for the whole fedora-l10n community which the tool uses to checkin/out files > for > translators, regardless of the SCM. I'm not sure if your realise that Pootle already does this. If we have a remote account anyone with commit rights in Pootle can commit to the SCM system. Personally I don't think it meshes with what most people want/like from upstream. So my suggestion is to add ability to Pootle to manage some of the SCM systems that we don't already do. We do CVS, Subversion and Darcs. I'd love to see the GNU stuff integrated - which involves all sorts of email exchanges. Then for those systems that won't allow a generic commit an offline tool that can query Pootle and get the files that need to be committed and be able to commit into the repository if the user has the authorisation and accounts. > Could these two could fit in Wordforge's vision for version control [2]? If > yes, > where and how? > > [2]: http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/wordforge/version_control Trust that answers in some way. -- Dwayne Bailey Translate.org.za +27-12-460-1095 (w) +27-83-443-7114 (cell) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Translate-pootle mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/translate-pootle
