openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Pootle setup for 4.0.1 (Re: Proposal -- AOO 4.0.1 Release)
Date Fri, 09 Aug 2013 07:17:10 GMT
On 8/8/13 4:33 PM, janI wrote:
> On 8 August 2013 15:28, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 8/8/13 3:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
>>>> On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> We have to convert them all in po, merge
>>>>> against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
>>>>> place/project and use new languages on demand
>>>> No problem, I would have preferred another way, but this is less work
>>>> now.
>>>
>>> I'm renaming this subthread, since we all agree on the 4.0.1 proposal in
>>> itself and discussions are only on the Pootle update now.
>>>
>>> I see in Pootle that the project names, after the discussion here, now
>>> follow the same pattern of 4.0.0: "aoo401" and "aoo401help": perfect.
>>>
>>> The point where I and Juergen disagree is how many languages should be
>>> available in Pootle.
>>>
>>> My deepest concern is that we don't waste the translators' time and that
>>> we are prepared to receive help immediately. So, for me, now is the time
>>> for importing everything from SDF to Pootle: we still have at least
>>> three languages (sr, sh, bg) where volunteers have been waiting for more
>>> than one week for us to put 4.0.0 in Pootle.
>>>
>>> Juergen, how can we guarantee that this is not the bottleneck if we
>>> don't import everything now? As for creating Pootle accounts, I usually
>>> create them within 24 hours, which is fine. But creating a Pootle
>>> project (a new language) looks more complex and more critical.
>>
>> by simply having a few more people having the necessary rights to access
>> the machine and doing the work directly.
>>
> 
> These people would also need to understand the pootle setup, since root
> access is needed. I will not recommend have extra root people on the vm,
> but if really needed we could change ownership of the po files so the
> vm-team can do the po commands.
> 
> 
>> Having all languages there requires even more maintenance work over time
>> that I am not willing to spend if there is no active community
>>
> 
> You see something that I overlook, please enlighten me.
> 
> Apart from the initial work (which have to be done at some point anyhow), I
> see our running maintenance as:
> - Maintain mysql, httpd and pootle (that is done by me alone today, and I
> dont need extra help)
> - Restart pootle in case of problems (that is done by vm-team, in total 5
> people, that should be enough)
> - Run "pootle refresh_stat" regulary (done by me, and with my current
> experience I will put it in crontab)
> - Run  "pootle sync" to update the po files for backup (currently only done
> by you, but I will be happy to put that in crontab as well, and btw 1 cmd,
> not 1 pr language).

well I run it via script on a set of languages ;-)

> 
> When we want to build for a release, there are a couple of extra issues:
> - Convert po files back to sdf (currently done by you, but that would only
> affect the languages we actually build, so no difference from today).

that will go away in the future hopefully

> 
> The only real extra work is when there are new strings:
> - Convert sdf files with templates to po files for each language.
> 
> This is real extra work, but I have proposed to do it this time, and I hope
> to have genLang ready for 4.1, so we can skip the conversion.

exactly and this is work that I don't want to do at the moment for
inactive languages.

But I am fine with adding all languages when the process uses po files
directly and more things can be automated.

Juergen

> 
> What extra work am I missing ?
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> I stopped to add languages more or less when we started the 4.0.1
>> discussion ...
>>
>> You will notice that initial 4.x projects use of course 4.x and not 4.0.
>> My understanding is that only the sdf files in svn count and Pootle is
>> just a tool. And in future the po files in svn counts instead of. I
>> don't think they have to be in sync. But anyway if people want to have
>> the overhead I am fine as long as I don't have to do the work.
>>
> I agree that svn is the source, and pootle is only a tool, but in the
> future the po directory will be direcly couple to svn (whether we allow
> pootle users to commit is a different discussion).
> 
> In the future (genLang and already tested) the idea is:
> - have the po directory made as a checkout from svn (main/languages)
> - after a pootle sync command, manually commit to svn (or if  agreed upon,
> let the pootle user do that).
> 
> so in the (hopefully) near future, only real maintenance needs to access
> the server.
> 
> 
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> As for the rest, see http://markmail.org/message/4oxacrviktdbmbcv but
>>> some important remarks are:
>>>
>>> 1) Languages that have 3.4.1 but not 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their
>>> work in the "aoo401" project (I don't know what this entails, but I
>>> assume that Jan's remarks about merging with the 4.0 templates apply
>> here)
>>
> that was my intention, of course first after we agree on it. The offer
> still stands, but I need to agree on the commands with jsc.
> 
> 
> 
>>>
>>> 2) Languages that have 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their work in the
>>> "aoo401" project (so, Jan, I believe that cloning aoo400->aoo401 is OK
>>> for this).
>>
> 
> correct
> 
>>>
>>> 3) Make "aoo401" the only active/writable/actionable/visible project,
>>> whatever options Pootle offers: volunteers should not be able to work on
>>> 3.4.1 or 4.0.0 on Pootle any longer, it would be wasted time.
>>
> 
> This is a bit difficult, pootle does not offer a readonly possibility.
> 
> I am all for removing the old projects (that will save both jsc and me
> time), but I understood on jsc that he wanted to keep them. We loose
> nothing be removing the old projects, since the source is in svn (sdf
> files).
> 
> 
> 
>>>
>>> (Obviously, the same holds for "aoo401help")
>>
> claro :-)
> 
> rgds
> jan I
> 
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>   Andrea.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message