Dimitris Glezos さんは書きました:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Kévin Raymond
<shaiton(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 2:32 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, noriko wrote:
>>
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> Sorry replying after closing the ticket, I was traveling Japan last two
>>> weeks and had no internet connection. Now I like you all involved to
>>> reconsider this RFR.
>>>
>>> As Jared pointed, it was clearly agreed to revisit. This offer is great
>>> opportunity for all translators to test new tool which has potential to
>>> be hosted at Fedora ground. And as Mike said, the conversation should
>>> start with translators, so that we will be able to come back. It is best
>>> to have a test instance within fp.o.
>>>
>>> Please notice that this RFR is just asking a test, not a move. As
>>> someone refer to the need or the cost (people power or $$), without
>>> testing, translators will not be able to evaluate those whether it is
>>> worth or not. I like you all to remind that it is not zero cost but it
>>> does cost running transifex for Fedora at
tx.net as well, manpower of
>>> Infidex.
>>>
>>> I have been strong supporter of Transifex, and still am confident that
>>> Transifex is excellent tool for translators in some projects. However
>>> there is no reason to deny other tools because it was just
>>> developed/introduced after Transifex. Most of translators even do not
>>> notice this discussion. I beg you, please give us a chance and let us
>>> discuss ourselves before making any decision somewhere we do not know.
>>> Please do not squash the opportunity for us.
>>>
>> They don't notice the discussion because no one has taken it there. I'm
>> not sure why we're even still discussing this here since not a single
>> email has been sent to
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/trans/ wrt
>> Zanata. It's not free for us to just hand over resources that could be
>> better planned. So I suggest again, start with the translators. If
>> someone on the infrastructure team is willing to sponsor it I'm sure
>> they'll speak up but it'd be a much better sell if the translation team
>> actually got together and said "sure, lets take a look"
> From the translator side, the best would be to introduce the tool
> (explain workflow/usage differences) before asking them to try it.
I also think we should have good documentation before requesting time
to try out a tool -- eg. how does it compare with alternative tools
such as Transifex, Pootle, Damned Lies, especially in the areas that
are important to Fedora.
Good point, I believe that the project team should have some
documentation. But also it can be said that it is hard to discuss
without seeing. A picture is worth a thousand words.
> We should not close our mind, but asking the busy infra to work
on
> something that nobody know (from infra as well as translators) is
> quite heavy.
Yp, thanks for this input! If this is the case I also disagree.
So far, I do not see any manpower requested in this RFR, but I can see
that there is the project team already formed and it asks for only
approval from Infra team on consuming certain resources.
> The best for now should be to take few translators who will
install
> this in their own hardware and try it for few weeks and come back
> later.
Personally I understand that it would be difficult for many of
translators to install and test it by themselves. It must be much easier
and straight forward to provide a sandbox to play around. If the project
team can not maintain that sandbox just for a test, it would not be
worth to proceed.
noriko
> We also need to know the difference in the developer side.