If there were translation teams, and I was the coordinator of my team...
* I would encourage all translators to have a CVS account and commit their changes, *provided* the file has been *reviewed* and *accepted* by the rest of the members of the team.
* I would encourage all translators to apply as maintainers for those files that they are familiar with, either because they have translated them before, or because they use them often, or for whatever reason. I would still give priority to the last translator to be the maintainer if he/she would like to.
* I would make sure that whenever a file is "taken" or "released" the team's mailing list, and specially the maintainer of a file, are informed about it.
* I would have more time to translate, and I would have to spend less time coordinating the team, assigning files and keeping track of who's doing what and for how long they have been doing it.
Roles:
*** Translator: the person translating a file at a given time.
*** Maintainer: is the person responsible to keep updated a file, whenever it needs improvements. This person would be responsible for any translation bugs on that file. He/she doesn't have to be the translator, though. The translator might change over time, upon team member's availability. A Maintainer should be informed about translators taking their files, and maybe maintainers should be able to commit at any time independently of who's taken the file... (if possible) Briefly, a maintainer is the person to contact for a certain file, and it often happens to be its translator too.
*** Coordinator (team): the person to contact about anything related to the translation of a certain language (as described in Christian Rose's description of the GNOME Model¹). It is the maintainer of all those files that have not yet a maintainer, or for whom s/he is the real maintainer, of course. It will commit files and act as a maintainer on behalf of translators that have no CVS account. The coordinator coaches new translators (could be done by maintainers too). Possibly the coordinator should have full CVS access to any file that belongs to its language. The election of the coordinator is up to each team, any changes about coordinator must be submitted to this mailing list. The coordinator should be informed about changes in Maintainers.
Maybe there could be the role of the "translation project coordinator" much like what Christian Rose is for the GNOME project, and which I suppose falls into Sarah Wang right now.
Fedora translation page should have a description of the translation process, teams, coordinators... you get the idea :)
All that... of course, if there were translation teams...
Briefly, combining teams with the new method have a lot of potential that we should explote.
Again, this is only my view, and there might be flaws, if there are I hope you can spot them and tell me :)
Best regards,
/Josep
Bernd: these might be the scriptures you were asking for :)
Note: not all members of a team have to be translators, there are also proof readers, philologists, users, etc, and not all of them have to have CVS access.
1) http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2004-June/msg00148.html
Josep,
If there were translation teams, and I was the coordinator of my team...
Isn't that the case? Do you want to be the maintainer of all modules for catalan now or not? I haven't heard any objections, so it's yours for the taking. :)
- I would encourage all translators to have a CVS account and commit
their changes, *provided* the file has been *reviewed* and *accepted* by the rest of the members of the team.
I'd encourage them too. But sometimes you want to commit something you're working on, even though you're not finished. And sometimes you'd like to commit something cos your finished, even though nobody else had time to review yet. If it's no good, you can always roll back. What our system does... you take a module, you work on it, you commit. If it's not finished, you have to release it if you don't want to work on it anymore. If it's finished, you're auto-released. If there's no maintainer, end of story. If there's a maintainer, module set to QA, all commit access blocked for everyone but the maintainer. Maintainer has to approve with either a commit or by clicking [Approve]. Maintainer can chose to wait for feedback from other reviewers.
- I would encourage all translators to apply as maintainers for those
files that they are familiar with, either because they have translated them before, or because they use them often, or for whatever reason. I would still give priority to the last translator to be the maintainer if he/she would like to.
I'd encourage them too. And I'd give priority to someone who was active translating the file.
- I would make sure that whenever a file is "taken" or "released" the
team's mailing list, and specially the maintainer of a file, are informed about it.
Yes, good point, I should add that feature. So far, only the translator is informed if s/he has been released. The maintainer is informed of commits, but informing the maintainer of take and release can indeed be helpful. And nothing speaks against the maintainer being a group, really.
- I would have more time to translate, and I would have to spend less
time coordinating the team, assigning files and keeping track of who's doing what and for how long they have been doing it.
That's the aim.
Roles:
*** Translator: the person translating a file at a given time.
That's the intention.
*** Maintainer: is the person responsible to keep updated a file, whenever it needs improvements. This person would be responsible for any translation bugs on that file. He/she doesn't have to be the translator, though. The translator might change over time, upon team member's availability.
That's the intention.
A Maintainer should be informed about translators taking their files, and maybe maintainers should be able to commit at any time independently of who's taken the file... (if possible)
Currently informed of commits, but of takes would be good too, I agree. And the maintainer can commit at any time, that was my main point for adding a maintainer.
Briefly, a maintainer is the person to contact for a certain file, and it often happens to be its translator too.
That's the intention.
*** Coordinator (team): the person to contact about anything related to the translation of a certain language (as described in Christian Rose's description of the GNOME Model¹). It is the maintainer of all those files that have not yet a maintainer, or for whom s/he is the real maintainer, of course. It will commit files and act as a maintainer on behalf of translators that have no CVS account.
That's who I'd assign all modules to by default (as a maintainer). That at least is the intention. When we have team pages up, we can formalize that all a bit more.
The coordinator coaches new translators (could be done by maintainers too). Possibly the coordinator should have full CVS access to any file that belongs to its language.
That is a valid point. So far, the coordinator has only full access to the files that are "unmaintained" (by being their maintainer). But I believe that's a good feature to add. And I believe everyone experienced can coach anyone new.
The election of the coordinator is up to each team, any changes about coordinator must be submitted to this mailing list. The coordinator should be informed about changes in Maintainers.
Maybe there could be the role of the "translation project coordinator" much like what Christian Rose is for the GNOME project, and which I suppose falls into Sarah Wang right now.
Fedora translation page should have a description of the translation process, teams, coordinators... you get the idea :)
Well, that's the plan, it'll just take a little longer. Sorry, if we can't put it up all at once.
All that... of course, if there were translation teams...
Well, there are, we know that, don't we? :)
Briefly, combining teams with the new method have a lot of potential that we should explote.
Again, this is only my view, and there might be flaws, if there are I hope you can spot them and tell me :)
No, I didn't spot any flaws, a lot of your suggestions have already been put in place with the new system. And that exactly is it what puzzles me. Given you've just suggested a lot of things that we've just put in place with the new status pages, why again is it that it is criticized so much? Why even do people say it nullifies existing translation teams? I don't have to get it, or do I? ;)
Best Regards, Bernd
Best regards,
/Josep
Bernd: these might be the scriptures you were asking for :)
Nah, that's pretty much the path I am going, as said, and a lot has been implemented with the new upgrade. I simply won't restrict anyone cvs access until we're fully organized, that's all. :)
Note: not all members of a team have to be translators, there are also proof readers, philologists, users, etc, and not all of them have to have CVS access.
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2004-June/msg00148.html
-- Fedora-trans-list mailing list Fedora-trans-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-trans-list
On Sat, 2004-06-26 at 08:16, Bernd Groh wrote:
Josep,
If there were translation teams, and I was the coordinator of my team...
Isn't that the case? Do you want to be the maintainer of all modules for catalan now or not? I haven't heard any objections, so it's yours for the taking. :)
I wanted to ask the other Catalan translators who are not subscribed here for comments, if they had any objections, etc, in our own mailing list (fedora at softcatala dot org). Although I haven't done that yet, I did apply as a maintainer for dist module (I was too lazy to go over all modules and apply for each one of them).
[cut]
All that... of course, if there were translation teams...
Well, there are, we know that, don't we? :)
YES, there are! It is just that newcomers will not notice if we don't tell them (ok, they will notice there's a maintainer, though, but that's not enough).
Briefly, combining teams with the new method have a lot of potential that we should explote.
Again, this is only my view, and there might be flaws, if there are I hope you can spot them and tell me :)
No, I didn't spot any flaws, a lot of your suggestions have already been put in place with the new system. And that exactly is it what puzzles me. Given you've just suggested a lot of things that we've just put in place with the new status pages, why again is it that it is criticized so much? Why even do people say it nullifies existing translation teams?
Because they are not mentioned at all, nor they seem to be encouraged, and because if I am a new translator I wouldn't know who to contact to (GNOME tells me very clearly to check for my team's coordinator). I don't think that what Christian meant was that teams can not be implemented, I think he meant that teams are not needed at all, thus will hardly be created, because you have to consider that translation teams have lots of translators with the best intentions that get tired too quickly (at least in my short experience).
I don't have to get it, or do I? ;)
Note, I don't want to claim this as "my suggestions". This is just what I could come up with by trying to be constructive, and mixing the "new" method with the traditional [and sound] teams method. It seems to be what you had in mind from the beginning, but it wasn't clear to some of us. But don't forget that all my posts beg for the presence of teams, I want them badly because I think they are the best way to guarantee quality and consistency, plus I add that the new system has potential, and can be useful to the teams, but I don't think it will be good without them.
Bernd: these might be the scriptures you were asking for :)
Nah, that's pretty much the path I am going, as said, and a lot has been
If the path you're going is the path we are going, maybe we should also know what the future plans are, and the direction we're taking.
implemented with the new upgrade. I simply won't restrict anyone cvs access until we're fully organized, that's all. :)
Ok, why not speed it up a bit, then? How can we help?
Seems to me that the crowds want teams. Then make a poll and check if that is so, and if it is, let's try to organize teams... Make a call for team building, or just look who's been committing for each language to find out who could be a maintainer (ask them to be maintainers, as you wanted us to ask translators to become part of our teams, I know you already did), or who could be a member of a team... Look the headers of the po files for email addresses of translators, see if they are subscribed here, maybe you could invite them to (maybe thank them for their work too)...
We should all post what we think the next step should be... it costs nothing to do, and it will help a lot.
I think that whatever the methodology/system for translations is going to be, it should be discussed in this list. Like I think this new method should have been discussed here too before being implemented. I mean, it is us (translators should be subscribed here) to whom it affect, and yet we didn't know about it until it appeared (at least I didn't).
So... TRANSLATORS: if you want your views to be listened, speak up. Nothing that you would like to be implemented will be unless we ask it for. And for those that can implement things, thanks for doing so! And please, keep us up to date about the next move, maybe we can improve it, maybe we can even help with it!
Best regards,
/Josep
Josep Puigdemont schrieb:
On Sat, 2004-06-26 at 08:16, Bernd Groh wrote:
Josep,
If there were translation teams, and I was the coordinator of my team...
Isn't that the case? Do you want to be the maintainer of all modules for catalan now or not? I haven't heard any objections, so it's yours for the taking. :)
I wanted to ask the other Catalan translators who are not subscribed here for comments, if they had any objections, etc, in our own mailing list (fedora at softcatala dot org). Although I haven't done that yet, I did apply as a maintainer for dist module (I was too lazy to go over all modules and apply for each one of them).
Hmmm, I didn't get any request. :( I'll look into it.
[cut]
All that... of course, if there were translation teams...
Well, there are, we know that, don't we? :)
YES, there are! It is just that newcomers will not notice if we don't tell them (ok, they will notice there's a maintainer, though, but that's not enough).
Agreed.
Briefly, combining teams with the new method have a lot of potential that we should explote.
Again, this is only my view, and there might be flaws, if there are I hope you can spot them and tell me :)
No, I didn't spot any flaws, a lot of your suggestions have already been put in place with the new system. And that exactly is it what puzzles me. Given you've just suggested a lot of things that we've just put in place with the new status pages, why again is it that it is criticized so much? Why even do people say it nullifies existing translation teams?
Because they are not mentioned at all, nor they seem to be encouraged,
Well, they weren't mentioned before, and as I read it, was most of the critique addressed particularly against the new status pages. Or was the critique not addressed at the new status pages in particular, but "now" or "new status pages" actually referred to "then" and "since the beginning"? If that's the case, why not say so explicitly, why blame the newest change? At least then I would have understood what you are on about and could have simply agreed with you straight away.
and because if I am a new translator I wouldn't know who to contact to (GNOME tells me very clearly to check for my team's coordinator). I don't think that what Christian meant was that teams can not be implemented, I think he meant that teams are not needed at all, thus will hardly be created, because you have to consider that translation teams have lots of translators with the best intentions that get tired too quickly (at least in my short experience).
Can you understand though, that it is hard for me to tell what is meant if the new status pages are blamed in particular? I believe, that the new status pages were simply a trigger, however, I am still not entirely sure.
I don't have to get it, or do I? ;)
Note, I don't want to claim this as "my suggestions". This is just what I could come up with by trying to be constructive, and mixing the "new" method with the traditional [and sound] teams method. It seems to be what you had in mind from the beginning, but it wasn't clear to some of us. But don't forget that all my posts beg for the presence of teams, I want them badly because I think they are the best way to guarantee quality and consistency, plus I add that the new system has potential, and can be useful to the teams, but I don't think it will be good without them.
Granted.
Bernd: these might be the scriptures you were asking for :)
Nah, that's pretty much the path I am going, as said, and a lot has been
If the path you're going is the path we are going, maybe we should also know what the future plans are, and the direction we're taking.
Of course, we want to get team pages up. And maybe that should be the next step, together with creating mailing lists for the individual languages. We all want that, Fedora wants that. Otherwise, I have to continue with how *I*'d do things, and that is *not* to be taken as any plans Fedora may have, it's what would happen if I had a say. I am not going to deny someone cvs access unless I have a person that I can make accountable for that decision. But, if there's a well organised team, that has a dedicated coordinator, then, on request of that coordinator, given it has the full support of the group, I'd be willing to require authorization, and not simply grant cvs access for that particular language. If nobody from within that language group is willing to take responsibility, and be accountable, then I am not going to make such call. Though I'd like to encourage groups, I am not going to mandate them. Hopefully groups will form, if they don't, well, so be it. I rather have people independently working on files, than not at all. I do not want to have a system that doesn't work if there's no group, or no coordinator to be found. I want to have a coordinator, or maintainers, that really want to be there, and aren't just there because somebody needs to do that job. And if a language group decides they function better without having a designated coordinator, since none is to be found, I would like to support that too. Nobody has to take on that responsibility if s/he doesn't really want to. Nobody has to be a maintainer if they only want to contribute translations. Only if you want this responsibility and you make yourself accountable to the user-community using that language-version of Fedora, only then you should take on maintaining a module, or on a larger scale, become the coordinator for an entire language. And that's basically it. However, that's only how I see things, of course, opinions differ, as we all know. :)
implemented with the new upgrade. I simply won't restrict anyone cvs access until we're fully organized, that's all. :)
Ok, why not speed it up a bit, then? How can we help?
Seems to me that the crowds want teams. Then make a poll and check if that is so, and if it is, let's try to organize teams... Make a call for team building, or just look who's been committing for each language to find out who could be a maintainer (ask them to be maintainers, as you wanted us to ask translators to become part of our teams, I know you already did), or who could be a member of a team... Look the headers of the po files for email addresses of translators, see if they are subscribed here, maybe you could invite them to (maybe thank them for their work too)...
No poll required, I believe team pages are necessary. How you can help? Well, maybe you can look at who's been commiting for each language and email me the list? :) Or, at least, and that's what everyone can help with, see who's been committing for your language, ask them to join this mailing list and speak up, and not just if things aren't the way they want them to be. And, thank you!
We should all post what we think the next step should be... it costs nothing to do, and it will help a lot.
Agreed.
I think that whatever the methodology/system for translations is going to be, it should be discussed in this list. Like I think this new method should have been discussed here too before being implemented. I mean, it is us (translators should be subscribed here) to whom it affect, and yet we didn't know about it until it appeared (at least I didn't).
Sounds reasonable. The participants of the individual mailing list will then have to post every system related issue that comes up also to this list though, since I couldn't do it, even if I wanted too. :) Maybe you can ask them to post all system related requests to this list? Thank you!
So... TRANSLATORS: if you want your views to be listened, speak up. Nothing that you would like to be implemented will be unless we ask it for. And for those that can implement things, thanks for doing so! And please, keep us up to date about the next move, maybe we can improve it, maybe we can even help with it!
I'll keep you up to date.
Regards, Bernd
Best regards,
/Josep
-- Fedora-trans-list mailing list Fedora-trans-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-trans-list
Hi!
On dl, 2004-06-28 at 08:17, Bernd Groh wrote:
Josep Puigdemont schrieb:
On Sat, 2004-06-26 at 08:16, Bernd Groh wrote:
Josep,
If there were translation teams, and I was the coordinator of my team...
Isn't that the case? Do you want to be the maintainer of all modules for catalan now or not? I haven't heard any objections, so it's yours for the taking. :)
I wanted to ask the other Catalan translators who are not subscribed here for comments, if they had any objections, etc, in our own mailing list (fedora at softcatala dot org). Although I haven't done that yet, I did apply as a maintainer for dist module (I was too lazy to go over all modules and apply for each one of them).
Hmmm, I didn't get any request. :( I'll look into it.
I've sent you an email about this. I did the request the 26th of June, but I'm not in a hurry about this, don't worry :)
No, I didn't spot any flaws, a lot of your suggestions have already been put in place with the new system. And that exactly is it what puzzles me. Given you've just suggested a lot of things that we've just put in place with the new status pages, why again is it that it is criticized so much? Why even do people say it nullifies existing translation teams?
Because they are not mentioned at all, nor they seem to be encouraged,
Well, they weren't mentioned before, and as I read it, was most of the critique addressed particularly against the new status pages. Or was the critique not addressed at the new status pages in particular, but "now" or "new status pages" actually referred to "then" and "since the beginning"? If that's the case, why not say so explicitly, why blame the newest change? At least then I would have understood what you are on about and could have simply agreed with you straight away.
For me it was not about the status pages, I was just worried about consistency and not having teams. I obviously missled you if I made you think otherwise. I think we agree in most of the thinks, though.
and because if I am a new translator I wouldn't know who to contact to (GNOME tells me very clearly to check for my team's coordinator). I don't think that what Christian meant was that teams can not be implemented, I think he meant that teams are not needed at all, thus will hardly be created, because you have to consider that translation teams have lots of translators with the best intentions that get tired too quickly (at least in my short experience).
Can you understand though, that it is hard for me to tell what is meant if the new status pages are blamed in particular? I believe, that the new status pages were simply a trigger, however, I am still not entirely sure.
Neither am I at this point!! well, summer is here and it seems that the waters are calm again, so I'm not going to "put more wood to the fire" (as we say).
If the path you're going is the path we are going, maybe we should also know what the future plans are, and the direction we're taking.
Of course, we want to get team pages up. And maybe that should be the next step, together with creating mailing lists for the individual languages. We all want that, Fedora wants that. Otherwise, I have to
How would that work for already established teams that already have mailing lists? Should they change to a Red Hat one? Would Fedora allow having lists outside Fedora? (our current list is fedora at softcatala dot org, which is open to everybody)
continue with how *I*'d do things, and that is *not* to be taken as any plans Fedora may have, it's what would happen if I had a say. I am not going to deny someone cvs access unless I have a person that I can make
[...]
implemented with the new upgrade. I simply won't restrict anyone cvs access until we're fully organized, that's all. :)
Ok, why not speed it up a bit, then? How can we help?
Seems to me that the crowds want teams. Then make a poll and check if that is so, and if it is, let's try to organize teams... Make a call for team building, or just look who's been committing for each language to find out who could be a maintainer (ask them to be maintainers, as you wanted us to ask translators to become part of our teams, I know you already did), or who could be a member of a team... Look the headers of the po files for email addresses of translators, see if they are subscribed here, maybe you could invite them to (maybe thank them for their work too)...
No poll required, I believe team pages are necessary. How you can help? Well, maybe you can look at who's been commiting for each language and
I'd gladly do that if it wasn't because I am on vacations on a remote town without a regular Internet connection (I connect at night when my GF is not looking, geeee! how was life before the Internet?! :)
email me the list? :) Or, at least, and that's what everyone can help with, see who's been committing for your language, ask them to join this mailing list and speak up, and not just if things aren't the way they want them to be. And, thank you!
I think I did that, but I'll tell them again.
I think that whatever the methodology/system for translations is going to be, it should be discussed in this list. Like I think this new method should have been discussed here too before being implemented. I mean, it is us (translators should be subscribed here) to whom it affect, and yet we didn't know about it until it appeared (at least I didn't).
Sounds reasonable. The participants of the individual mailing list will
What are those individual mailing lists, anyway?
then have to post every system related issue that comes up also to this list though, since I couldn't do it, even if I wanted too. :) Maybe you can ask them to post all system related requests to this list? Thank you!
No need to cross post anything, from Fedora's web site: "The place to discuss general translation issues is fedora-trans-list." So let be it :)
I can't be subscribed to all mailing lists to see what's going to happen with Fedora's translation system.
I'll keep you up to date.
Thanks!
/Josep
-
Bernd Groh -
Josep Puigdemont