Re: [gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-15 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> [l...@gnu.org - Fri Feb 14 06:03:29 2014]: >> >> "Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> > >> > So, are we to change the source format of blurb items to HTML? if yes, >> > I'd file >> > a patch to bug-womb. >> >> I became convinced that we (Guix) could just get files from the W

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-15 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> [l...@gnu.org - Fri Feb 14 06:03:29 2014]: >> >> "Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> > >> > So, are we to change the source format of blurb items to HTML? if yes, >> > I'd file >> > a patch to bug-womb. >> >> I became convinced that we (Guix) could just get files from the W

[gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-15 Thread Ineiev via RT
> [l...@gnu.org - Fri Feb 14 06:03:29 2014]: > > "Ineiev via RT" skribis: > > > > So, are we to change the source format of blurb items to HTML? if yes, > > I'd file > > a patch to bug-womb. > > I became convinced that we (Guix) could just get files from the Web > translators and patch occurrenc

Re: [bug-womb] [gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-14 Thread Karl Berry via RT
So, are we to change the source format of blurb items to HTML? It seems ugly to me in principle, but if the consensus is that that is the most useful approach, ok, I won't object (i.e., will install the patch :). I don't have strong feelings about it. karl

Re: [bug-womb] [gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-14 Thread Karl Berry
So, are we to change the source format of blurb items to HTML? It seems ugly to me in principle, but if the consensus is that that is the most useful approach, ok, I won't object (i.e., will install the patch :). I don't have strong feelings about it. karl

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-14 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> [karl - Sat Jan 11 18:34:38 2014]: >> >> > What would you prefer? >> >> I prefer plain text, but I don't feel that strongly about it, as such. >> >> > about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? >> >> If the "translation" you're referring to is the ho

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-14 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> [karl - Sat Jan 11 18:34:38 2014]: >> >> > What would you prefer? >> >> I prefer plain text, but I don't feel that strongly about it, as such. >> >> > about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? >> >> If the "translation" you're referring to is the ho

[gnu.org #881181] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-02-13 Thread Ineiev via RT
> [karl - Sat Jan 11 18:34:38 2014]: > > > What would you prefer? > > I prefer plain text, but I don't feel that strongly about it, as such. > > > about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? > > If the "translation" you're referring to is the home-pkgblurbs.html file > which the w

Re: [bug-womb] [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread John Darrington via RT
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 06:34:38PM -0500, Karl Berry via RT wrote: On the other hand, having translations simultaneously happening in TP and www seems like a lot of headache to me. I agree, and this is what I was alluding to in my previous emails - and in some cases the work is n

Re: [bug-womb] [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread John Darrington
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 06:34:38PM -0500, Karl Berry via RT wrote: On the other hand, having translations simultaneously happening in TP and www seems like a lot of headache to me. I agree, and this is what I was alluding to in my previous emails - and in some cases the work is n

Re: [bug-womb] [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread Karl Berry via RT
What would you prefer? I prefer plain text, but I don't feel that strongly about it, as such. about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? If the "translation" you're referring to is the home-pkgblurbs.html file which the web translators work with, that is (obviously) specif

Re: [bug-womb] [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread Karl Berry
What would you prefer? I prefer plain text, but I don't feel that strongly about it, as such. about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? If the "translation" you're referring to is the home-pkgblurbs.html file which the web translators work with, that is (obviously) specif

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/11/2014 10:21 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > how about not introducing HTML markup in the translated text? I'm afraid www.gnu.org translators would object; sometimes they want to adjust the markup.

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Karl Berry via RT" skribis: > I thought you guys didn't want these hypothetical TP translators to see > HTML. If you do, fine, we can make the original be HTML, at least as > far as the internal text goes, which is the only concern here afaik. This is really just a suggestion. What would you

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-11 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Karl Berry via RT" skribis: > I thought you guys didn't want these hypothetical TP translators to see > HTML. If you do, fine, we can make the original be HTML, at least as > far as the internal text goes, which is the only concern here afaik. This is really just a suggestion. What would you

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread Karl Berry via RT
I thought you guys didn't want these hypothetical TP translators to see HTML. If you do, fine, we can make the original be HTML, at least as far as the internal text goes, which is the only concern here afaik. Brandon and I wrote the blurbs in plain text simply because it seemed natural; everythi

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread Karl Berry
I thought you guys didn't want these hypothetical TP translators to see HTML. If you do, fine, we can make the original be HTML, at least as far as the internal text goes, which is the only concern here afaik. Brandon and I wrote the blurbs in plain text simply because it seemed natural; everythi

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/10/2014 01:17 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > It seems to me that the ideal would be to have (HTML) markup in the > authoritative source (pkgblurbs.txt). Then users could choose whether > to keep/convert/discard that markup. I believe it’s more flexible and > robust than trying to infer

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/10/2014 01:20 PM, John Darrington via RT wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:44:25AM -0500, Ineiev via RT wrote: > > Then, there are also s (which may "translate" into something > different, like or ) and a few other substitutions [1]. > I wonder whether it would be easi

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread John Darrington
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:44:25AM -0500, Ineiev via RT wrote: Then, there are also s (which may "translate" into something different, like or ) and a few other substitutions [1]. I wonder whether it would be easier if guix used HTML in PO files and converted it to plain

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread John Darrington via RT
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:44:25AM -0500, Ineiev via RT wrote: Then, there are also s (which may "translate" into something different, like or ) and a few other substitutions [1]. I wonder whether it would be easier if guix used HTML in PO files and converted it to plain

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > On 01/10/2014 03:12 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > >> > >> (0) when a new (or corrected) translation is committed to www, www > >> translators send updates to TP, and they merge it to their PO files; > >> > >> (1) when a new translation is submitted to TP, the

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-10 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > On 01/10/2014 03:12 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > >> > >> (0) when a new (or corrected) translation is committed to www, www > >> translators send updates to TP, and they merge it to their PO files; > >> > >> (1) when a new translation is submitted to TP, the

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/10/2014 03:12 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: >> >> (0) when a new (or corrected) translation is committed to www, www >> translators send updates to TP, and they merge it to their PO files; >> >> (1) when a new translation is submitted to TP, the translators send >> a copy to the res

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > I think it can be organized this way: > > (0) when a new (or corrected) translation is committed to www, www > translators send updates to TP, and they merge it to their PO files; > > (1) when a new translation is submitted to TP, the translators send > a copy to the re

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > I think it can be organized this way: > > (0) when a new (or corrected) translation is committed to www, www > translators send updates to TP, and they merge it to their PO files; > > (1) when a new translation is submitted to TP, the translators send > a copy to the re

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/09/2014 01:29 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > I mean, we already have a few package translations at > (representing the only > package file currently in POTFILES), but obviously the translators were > not aware of what was being done on

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > On 01/09/2014 02:57 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: >> "Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> >>> If there are other (non-web) translators, we may want to arrange a cron job >>> to commit their translations to www. >> >> There would likely be duplicated work if there were bot

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > On 01/09/2014 02:57 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: >> "Ineiev via RT" skribis: >> >>> If there are other (non-web) translators, we may want to arrange a cron job >>> to commit their translations to www. >> >> There would likely be duplicated work if there were bot

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread John Darrington via RT
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 06:25:37AM -0500, Ineiev via RT wrote: No, I'm suggesting that it's possible to delegate the work to groups other than GNU web translators (especially when we have no active team for a language), and www.gnu.org can take advantage of it. I agree - and t

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread John Darrington
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 06:25:37AM -0500, Ineiev via RT wrote: No, I'm suggesting that it's possible to delegate the work to groups other than GNU web translators (especially when we have no active team for a language), and www.gnu.org can take advantage of it. I agree - and t

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/09/2014 02:57 PM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > "Ineiev via RT" skribis: > >> If there are other (non-web) translators, we may want to arrange a cron job >> to commit their translations to www. > > There would likely be duplicated work if there were both www and non www > people translat

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès via RT
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > If there are other (non-web) translators, we may want to arrange a cron job > to commit their translations to www. There would likely be duplicated work if there were both www and non www people translating these things, which is why I started this discussion. Are you

Re: [gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Ineiev via RT" skribis: > If there are other (non-web) translators, we may want to arrange a cron job > to commit their translations to www. There would likely be duplicated work if there were both www and non www people translating these things, which is why I started this discussion. Are you

[gnu.org #881181] Re: [gnu.org #881518] Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-08 Thread Ineiev via RT
On 01/08/2014 03:06 AM, Ludovic Courtès via RT wrote: > John Darrington skribis: > >> Well, does it work now? do we have translations of every package >> description in Womb? > > Translations are in the www repo. Actually, only French translations are complete; in Japanese, German and Russian

Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
John Darrington skribis: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 11:17:35AM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote: > John Darrington skribis: > > > I think the most desirable approach is to encourage package > maintainers, to > > append the "Synopsis", "Description", "GenericName" etc strings t

Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-07 Thread John Darrington
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 11:17:35AM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote: John Darrington skribis: > I think the most desirable approach is to encourage package maintainers, to > append the "Synopsis", "Description", "GenericName" etc strings to the .pot > files for their proj

Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
John Darrington skribis: > Packages which have a GUI, also need a .desktop file, which contains > two translatable strings: "GenericName", and "Comment". For example, > here is the .desktop file from pspp: > > [Desktop Entry] > Name=GNU PSPP > GenericName=Statistical Software > GenericName[ca]=

Re: Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-07 Thread John Darrington
Packages which have a GUI, also need a .desktop file, which contains two translatable strings: "GenericName", and "Comment". For example, here is the .desktop file from pspp: [Desktop Entry] Name=GNU PSPP GenericName=Statistical Software GenericName[ca]=Programari estad??stic GenericName[cs]=Sta

Re: [bug-womb] Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-06 Thread Karl Berry
http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/*checkout*/gnumaint/pkgblurbs.txt Looking at www/server, it seems there are currently some translations of the blurbs for ru, fr, de, ja (just judging by file sizes). I suggest the path of least resistance is to take these web translations as the source for

Package synopses and blurbs translation

2014-01-06 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, and best wishes! As discussed before [0], Guix needs to provide users with translated package synopses and descriptions. It gets its synopses and descriptions for GNU packages from the Womb [1,2] (so does GSRC, IIRC), and has its own for non-GNU packages. There’s gettext infrastructure re