openoffice-l10n mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Claudio Filho <>
Subject Re: [Discuss][Wiki]"Synchronizing" (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My "roadmap"]
Date Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:36:45 GMT

2013/6/3 RGB ES <>:
> 2013/6/3 Andrea Pescetti <>
>> On 02/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:
>>> Do we want to "clone", for example, the documentation section on all the
>>> localized sites, just translating it? On Sun times that was the idea, with
>>> sub sites ("portals") like
>>> etc looking almost the same on all languages.

Ricardo, we can go by two ways, based in commom practice for mediawiki:
http://wiki.../Documentation and http://wiki.../Documentation/<lang> -
for localized pages from the core
http://wiki.../<LANG>/<anything> - for local/native texts.

>> This can work. We also have this other infrastructure in place
>> added by Claudio a few months ago. See
>> to see how it works. I don't know which approach is best for our case.

The *Template:* "technology" is for many other things, like menus,
sorts, and others. I think that we can use this first step based in
review the core and a way to translate it for other languages.

How our system is a mediawiki, i did a research about localization in
this software with the last methods, where i found some interesting
contents. I believe that with translate extension for mediawiki we
have the tool for this goal.

>> As for keeping subsites synchronized, in theory this allows to have a
>> "Master copy" in English and then translate it in the various languages as
>> volunteers become available. In practice, we can't stop someone from
>> editing or creating a translated page to add new content in a language
>> only, but ideally this would imply that the English version is updated to
>> reflect the changes too.

If i understood right, the translate extension will help us in this task.

> All those "portal" pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
> the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
> Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right
> PDL is a sort of "copyleft" license.

This is a excelent question. I ask to my self how the TDF did about
(more) this question. Can we do like them? Simply overwrite the
license and to continue the devel? (i remember when they copied all
sites/docs/contents, like api site, and changed the license)

> Re-license those pages is not possible without the explicit consent of the
> author, and those pages are so old that contact the authors is almost
> impossible. Suppose we update those pages to point to the new material. A
> potential contributor (or just a casual reader) will see the PDL notice on
> the portal page, and no notice on the new pages: from the user perspective,
> does this means that the new page is also under PDL? We know it isn't, but
> this could be a cause of confusion, IMO. So, which is the best way to work
> around this problem? Reimplement those pages, making a clear separation
> between new material (under Apache) and legacy content?

Maybe this is the unique way. By other hand, is a opportunity of
review all content in the wiki, reorder and clean it, and evolve based
in the correct license. In some cases, we can see the page history and
try to find the author. Some parts, i believe that is all from
Sun/Oracle copyright, so transfered to ASF.

My 2ยข

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message