Re: 2010 Q4 GNOME Quarterly Report

[Claude Paroz <claude 2xlibre net>]

Thanks Petr, it's perfect for me!

Claude

Le mercredi 19 janvier 2011 à 03:03 +0100, Petr Kovar a écrit :
> Hi all,
> 
> here comes my proposal for a GNOME Localization update for the upcoming
> 2010 Q4 GNOME Quarterly Report. Sorry for being a little bit late with it!
> 
> If you think something is not correct or missing, please feel free to share
> your feedback and suggestions, or simply edit the text directly at:
> 
> http://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/QuarterlyReports/2010/Q4
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Best,
> Petr Kovar
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Localization
> 
> On October 16, Gil Forcada presented results of the GNOME I18N Survey which
> was referred to in the previous report. A brief analysis of the results was
> included. 
> 
> Discussion on the possibility and feasibility of translating schema files
> within separated gettext domains or catalogs emerged from the survey
> analysis debate, as well as the point of localizing certain types of
> strings that are usually not user-visible. Especially the price of
> splitting limited resources within smaller translation teams was compared
> with the eventual need to make significant changes to the current GNOME
> i18n infrastructure and also to various module build systems.
> 
> With regard to the Release Team's second proposal for moduleset
> reorganization from October 7, which would allow various software projects
> outside of the GNOME infrastructure to become officially endorsed GNOME
> software, members of the GNOME Translation Project expressed strong
> preference for working on l10n support within the GNOME official i18n and
> SCM infrastructure.
> 
> In the debate which spread over the gnome-18n and desktop-devel-list
> groups, GNOME translators were mainly concerned about translation quality,
> string freeze periods and release schedules, about expecting developers or
> maintainers to integrate translations manually to their respective
> repositories in a suitable, timely manner, and generally about changing the
> current module requirements by dropping them and/or making them optional for
> official GNOME software and GNOME developers.
> 
> Several proposals were made to (require to) allow the DL infrastructure on
> l10n.gnome.org auto-commit translations to code repositories not hosted on
> git.gnome.org, to migrate from the DL application altogether and replace it
> with Transifex, and generally to specify l10n requirements for official
> modules more narrowly and precisely. No final resolution was made in this
> regard.
> 
> Sysadmin work on DL auto-commit, providing translators a way to manage l10n
> support without interacting with Git system directly, was resumed during
> October and November. Furthermore, GTP members discussed options to
> integrate automatic QA checking with l10n.gnome.org.
> 
> There were also changes in coordination of the Persian and Romanian team in
> October and November, respectively.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-i18n mailing list
> gnome-i18n gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n