httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel <>
Subject Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:50:39 GMT

I'm Daniel Ferradal, as Richard Bowen says, I plan to help translating to
Spanish in the best way I can.

To me this is all new, so when I saw in the which is the
method you guys use to define the documentation, I did a checkout of
httpd-2.4 and trunk and saw 2.4 had fewer translations, and so I thought it
would be a good place to start.

As Richard mentions, right now this is the list of trunk "" files,
the ones marked with * are not present in httpd-2.4.
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/howto/ *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/howto/ *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/ *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/ *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/ *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/ *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/ *

Seeing the difference I started translating one sample in httpd-2.4, if you
guys like it I will just keep on working with trunk, httpd-2.4 or whatever
you guys prefer.

In my humble opinion it would be good to have all actual documentation, at
least for 2.4 translated, since that's probably the most used docs, but
just tell me where to point and I'll go. Rich told me to concentrate on
trunk before anything else but if you want to point me to specific files,
just tell me.

Here is my first sample ( for httpd-2.4) , hope you guys like it:

2016-10-19 15:24 GMT+02:00 Rich Bowen <>:

> (Summarizing a conversation from IRC)
> ezra-s (Daniel Ferradal) is beginning to work on our Spanish docs
> translation. This led to discussion of a number of points surrounding
> translations:
> * There are some (numerous?) .es files in 2.4 that are not in trunk.
> These need to be identified, and where appropriate, copied/moved into
> trunk, so that they are not lost in the future. Translation work should
> (usually) happen in trunk first, and then be (intelligently - of course
> some stuff is trunk-only) copied to 2.4 and possibly (?) 2.2. We have
> apparently done a poor job of communicating and policing this, and need
> to update our translation docs accordingly. The usual catchphrase is,
> Upstream First.
> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it. Discussion?
> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
> having a less conversational style, would come later.
> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers. But for certain
> languages (Spanish, French, Japanese, Chinese, Russian) it would seem
> that we have an enormous pool of users to draw from. Perhaps time to do
> some recruiting on users@? I believe we should first address the above
> items, though, so that they're coming into a well-documented encouraging
> environment, rather than picking up a lot of abandoned partially
> translated things. Indeed, it might be good to go ahead and drop entire
> languages from trunk, so that a new translator has a clean slate to work
> with. I know I find that less frustrating, myself.
> Please discuss, so I'm not just talking to myself. :-)
> --
> Rich Bowen - - @rbowen
> - @apachecon

*Daniel Ferradal*
IT Specialist

email         daniel at

View raw message