All,
This is in reference to the discussion that happening around
Bug 434 "updatepofile/commitpofile needs to be moved to translate toolkit"
trying to think about how the code move should be done according to
translation workflow and also in alignment with Pootle strengths.
This attempts to focus on the general guidelines on how we should
base our decisions on code move rather than the specific
updatepofile/commitpofile APIs discusses
When trying to automate some of the current manual steps in translation
workflow like connect to the project po directory from Pootle (see the
patch for http://bugs.locamotion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=452), one thing
that came to mind is, as a result of configuring a "Project L10N directory"
(See the screenshot
http://bugs.locamotion.org/attachment.cgi?id=167&action=view )
from Pootle, if the project po directory is sufficiently large, the pootle
sort of freezes while the server is initially indexing the .po files and
creating .stats and .prefs files. (I have observed that if I configure
all the languages used by a Gnome application like gedit in Pootle,
create a link to gedit po directory, then the server virtually freezes
when it's initially indexing the whole files for 4-5 minutes in my
machine)
Once we initially create these needed indexes and other files, the incremental
updates to these files are done as the translation process progresses
and is less resource intensive. So I thought the logical place of initial
operations will be outside Pootle. Similarly I was thinking about the
the final commit after the translations are done and are approved, also
server intensive and can be done outside Pootle.
During the translation workflow the following actions typically take place.
1. Initial creation of project
2. Addition of new languages of the project in Pootle.
3. Pootle initial indexing and creating .prefs/.stat files
3. Translation assignments and actual process of translation
4. Updating the translations from RCS periodically during the translation cycle
5. Translation review/approval
6. Final update/commit of the translations
It seems to me that steps 1-3 and step 6 are best handled in an outside script
as these are intensive operations. These can be best done during the scheduled
downtime of the PootleServer
While it's beneficial to have the functionality both in Pootle and in an
external
script, some operations like externally adding po files etc needs server restart
so within the current framework these are best addressed from a outside script
So doesn't it make sense to base the code move decisions from Pootle to
translate
toolkit based on this ?
Regards,
Suresh
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Translate-pootle mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/translate-pootle
