trans July 2004

trans@lists.fedoraproject.org

27 participants
23 discussions

RE: Hungarian members
by Hauk Viktor 04 Jul '04

04 Jul '04

> Hi, > > I joined recently the translation project. How many > hungarians are involved? Can anybody tell me? > > Zoltan > > The Hungarian translation team is "led" by Tamas Szanto [tszanto@MOL.hu]...well he's the uy who did most of the translating. Can't exactly tell how many we are but any help is welcome :D With kind regards Viktor viktor.hauk(a)kurt.hu

3 2

Re: About the new Status Pages
by hutuworm 01 Jul '04

01 Jul '04

Bernd Groh, Thank you very much for your hard work and good job! :D I've just tried the updated status system, it really works well. Thank you. ======= 2004-07-01 09:13:50 Quote from your mail ======= >Hi All, > >since there has been some confusion about the new status pages, I feel >like I need to summarize what actually happened, and let me assure you, >it wasn't a step away from teams. Established language teams are well >considered by the new status pages, much more than previously. Yes, we >are still missing team pages, and we do apologise for not having had the >ressources to put them up yet, but it is our intention to do so. Things >are moving towards teams, and we'd like to encourage them, however, we >are reluctant to mandate things and tell you how things are going to be, >since that's not entirely up to us, but also up to you. > >So, what is new? > >First new thing is that a module can be assigned to a Translator and >there is a [Take]/[Release] mechanism in place. What exactly is a >Translator in this respect? A Translator is a person translating a file >at a given time (thanks, Josep ). What's it for? Two things. First, so >other people know who's currently doing what, and second, to minimise >conflicts because two translators are working on the same file at the >same time. You say that wouldn't happen if you'd have a group and one >coordinator to coordinate all translations of the group? For a small >group that might be feasible, but if you have one coordinator and 70+ >translators, things can get quite difficult to manage this way. Also, we >would require the coordinator to be available at all time, we'd require >the coordinator to make a decision, or we'd require 70 people to >discuss about who's going to translate the file. Sometimes it is much >easier if, given the translator can do a good translation of the file, >whoever sees first that there is a file to be translated, that this >translator just does the job. Sometimes, there can be too much talking >about things, and it is, in fact, better to just do it. And there's >nothing that says that that's not how the group wants to do things. Not >all groups work in the same way. That might have an effect on >consistency? If the group has already agreed on a certain terminology, >and a person of that group simply does the job, without requiring too >much talking about it, how? As said, different groups work differently, >and I do not like the idea to build a system that is set to a certain >way, I rather build a system that can accommodate a large range of >behaviours of groups, or even of individuals. And yes, I am aware of the >disadvantages of this system, but IMO, groups should form because groups >want to form, and not because they have to form in order for the entire >system to work, groups should form in the way they want to form, and not >in one certain way, because that's the only way the system accommodates >for it. > >How was the [Take]/[Release] mechanism intended to be used? A file >should be [Take]n before starting the translation, before doing a last >cvs up. Then the file should be worked on, and it should be commited >whenever you stop translating it. If you intend to keep working on it >soon, you keep the file, otherwise, you [Release] it. If you do commit a >finished file, it'll be released automatically. > >This allows people to work independently, without requiring a group? >Yes, it does. It doesn't encourage groups? No, it doesn't. It is not the >job of a system to encourage groups, it is the job of people. People >encourage other people. I'd encourage anyone to join a group, everyone >should encourage everyone to join a group. If it is really the case that >most people ask for groups, and want to work in groups, why should it >even be necessary to mandate them? Shouldn't it then be the case that >most people actually do work in groups? It is up to every individual to >form a group, and to work in groups, it is, IMO, not up to one >individual to make groups happen. > >What else is new? > >The system allows for a module to have a maintainer. What exactly is a >Maintainer in this respect? A Maintainer is the person accountable for >the translation of a file. A Maintainer is the person commited to >providing a high-quality translation of that module to the >user-community. Yes, the maintainer is also the one who takes the blame >for a bad translation. As such, to compensate for the additional >responsibilities, the maintainer also has additional privileges. The >maintainer can manage who's translating the file. A maintainer is now >informed if someone takes the file (thanks, Josep ), and can chose to >release the module and take it herself/himself or to get someone else to >take it. A Maintainer is also informed of all commits to the file. If a >module has been finished, the module will automatically be set to QA and >the maintainer is now the only person with commit access to this file, >unless s/he [Approve]s it, or commits it, which we recognize as approval. > >How do we support established translation teams? By making them >maintainers of modules, by letting them take over the responsibility >they've been carrying in the past, and by now providing them with a >mechanism to better manage the translation of a particular module, also >with informing them if somebody else is working on the file. Do we >support coordinators? Coordinators of small teams are invited to apply >for maintainership of all modules of a certain language. In general, and >if there are no objections from other members within the same language >group, this will be granted. For large teams, it may be better to split >maintainership to several individuals by coordinating/maintaining a >group of modules, however, we'd still, given there are no objections, >grant such request. If at any time, there are objections with regards to >a certain maintainer, everyone objecting is invited to make their case. >Every opinion will be heard, and we're happy to take concerns to a >maintainer directly. > >That's about all. Again, apologies if the introduction of the new status >pages has been confusing, it wasn't our intention, and we will discuss >any further change on this list now. We'd also like to encourage people >to speak up, and not just if things aren't the way they want them to be. >After all, it is everyone's community. > >Regards, >Bernd > >-- >Dr. Bernd R. Groh Phone : +61 7 3514 8114 >Software Engineer (Localization) Fax : +61 7 3514 8199 >Red Hat Asia-Pacific Mobile: +61 403 851 269 >Disclaimer: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer/ > > > >-- >Fedora-trans-list mailing list >Fedora-trans-list(a)redhat.com >http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-trans-list > ================================================== hutuworm

1 0

Hungarian members
by Zoltan Kota 01 Jul '04

01 Jul '04

Hi, I joined recently the translation project. How many hungarians are involved? Can anybody tell me? Zoltan

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

trans July 2004