On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> >>> wrote: >>>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new >>>> thread. >>>> >>>> For reference here is the old policy: >>>> >>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements >>>> >>>> My new suggestion: >>>> >>>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. >>>> >>>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. >>>> >>>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This >>>> should be translated much better than 90%. >>>> >>>> Why? >>>> >>>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do >>>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I >>>> don't think so. >>>> >>>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or >>> better >>>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. >>>> >>>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. >>>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. >>> They >>>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated >>>> parts. >>>> >>>> And now, add your points. >>>> >>> >>> >>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be >>> open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising >>> the bar, not lowering it. >>> >>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then >>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. >>> >> >> In many cases, it is probably a "time" factor rather than an interest >> factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication >> between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to >> release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement. >> >> >> >>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only >>> a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and >>> then release it. >>> >>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no >>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it >>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will >>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to >>> release. >>> >> >> yes, I agree. >> >> >>> >>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two >>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that >>> is better than releasing something only partially done. >>> >>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here. If we allow 90% complete >>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. >>> >> >> again, agreement >> >> >>> >>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of >>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%. Not for >>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current >>> state and help translate. >>> >> >> hmmmm...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy. >> >> I guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development >> snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate >> this. >> > > I mean treat it *exactly* like we do a dev snapshot. It is not > advertised outside of the project. The only difference is it would > be built with the AOO 4.0 release code revision. Or think of itas > being an early build of the re-release of AOO 4.0 with additional > languages. Eventually, if/when the translation is completed, we have > a RC at that time, and a vote and then they are released.
So a policy could be that we will build Dev Snapshots of Language Packs if the translation is over N%? Where N could be 80 or 75%? I think that this would encourage language communities to make the effort. Regards, Dave > > -Rob > > >> >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>>> Marcus >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<robw...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jogischm...@gmail.com >>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat< >>>>>> >>>>>> ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed >>>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an >>>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on >>> the >>>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the >>>>>> >>>>>> mailing >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> list..."). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times >>> we >>>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI >>>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature >>> is >>>>>>>>> incomplete >>>>>> >>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? >>>>>> >>>>>> The >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this >>>>>> >>>>>> 4.0.0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> RC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very >>>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous >>>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source >>>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to >>>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It >>>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version >>>>>> >>>>>> released. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September >>>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join >>>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in >>>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is >>> not >>>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their >>>>>>>> development could not be based on. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. >>>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with >>>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and >>>>>> we >>>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to >>>>>> support >>>>>> local communities. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who >>>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want >>>>>> to "miss the train". >>>>>> >>>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train >>>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon. Maybe >>>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're >>>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of >>>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations). Hopefully we all remember >>>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after >>>>>> we released. >>>>>> >>>>>> From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in >>>>>> translating AOO to other languages. There will always be another >>>>>> language that is "almost ready". That is what success looks like. We >>>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready. We can't hold up >>>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the >>>>>> next train. >>>>>> >>>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages? >>>>>> Is that enough time? >>>>>> >>>>>> -Rob >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping, >>>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the >>> 4.0 >>>>> release. >>>>> >>>>> Re the old stated "policy" on : >>>>> >>>>> >>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements >>>>> >>>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this. >>>>> >>>>> But...I think we should first discuss the policy. What levels of >>>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we >>>>> absolutely >>>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example. >>>>> >>>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy >>> on >>>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site: >>>>> >>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released >>> German >>>>>> >>>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not >>> complete. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who >>> participate >>>>>> >>>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but >>> that >>>>>> >>>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Juergen >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> MzK >> >> Success is falling nine times and getting up ten." >> -- Jon Bon Jovi > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
