Hi, > ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ----- > Von: Jan Holesovsky > Gesendet: 04.01.11 16:46 Uhr ... > > Basically, it suggests what Freek says - having git as the authoritative > source, while providing all the strengths of Pootle as Andras explained > (xliff, downloading/uploading of tarballs, etc.) > > An admin with the appropriate rights gets an [Update] button that > transparently updates the files from git (should there be changes in git > by the translators that commit their changes directly). The page says > that there is also possible to trigger commit from the Pootle server, > though there are some troubles there; I'll look more. > > If this works, to me it seems that this is be the best from all the > worlds: ... > > How does that sound?
Yes, this would surely be the prefered solution. Some problems that we might run into: - the pootle server process is running under the apache user account on the server, so the commits to vcs will be done using this account. This might be a problem with ssl authentification as used at fdo's git. Commit permissions from the translator's (WebUI) perspective can be set per user, but will be handled by the same system user in the background. - afaik pootle is not prepared to properly handle conflicts (maybe we can get help from translate.za team or we need to define pootle vs. vcs it as "either direction solution" per language. (Already mentioned by rimas) - performance might be a problem. Currently we use memcached (so translation files, statistics ... are in memory). I experienced delays, when files were flushed to disk or re-read from disk. Ok, nothing that should stop us from providing a good solution, but we need to have a look at. Regards, André -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to l10n+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/l10n/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
