incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Louis Suárez-Potts <lsuarezpo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Pootle Data
Date Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:04:52 GMT
Hi

On 8 February 2012 11:49, Andre Fischer <af@a-w-f.de> wrote:
> On 08.02.2012 17:31, Stuart Swales wrote:
>>
>> On 07/02/2012 14:02, Andre Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I recently had a little time to look at the pootle data. Here is what I
>>> have found out so far. Please keep in mind that this is new for me and
>>> that my interpretations may be wrong.
>>>
>>> For context I will start with a short description of the directory
>>> structure of the 80 GB of the backup disk:
>>>
>>> In the top-level podirectory/ there is a sub-directory openoffice_org/
>>> that probably is the translation data of OpenOffice.org. It contains
>>> sub-directories for most languages (more on the exact set below.)
>>> The content of podirectory is available at [1].
>>>
>>> Below the top-level backup/ there are two directories DEV_m103/ and
>>> DEV_94/ for two milestones. Below these you can find directories like
>>> backconvert-110326/ that probably contain backups for certain dates
>>> (March 26 2011 in this example. The most recent is
>>> DEV_m103/backconvert-110401 from April 1st of last year.
>>>
>>> After comparing time stamps I now think that we can disregard the whole
>>> backup/ directory. There are .po files under podirectory/ that are from
>>> later then April 1st. Some files are from May.
>>>
>>> I then tried to find out whether the pootle data are older or newer than
>>> the data in the extras/l10n module in our SVN repository. The timestamps
>>> in the .sdf files are useless, our tools set them all to 2002-02-02. The
>>> file time stamps can not be used directly because of the differing
>>> directory structures.
>>>
>>> Comparing the set of lanuages of the pootle server and that in
>>> extras/l10n/ was also inconclusive:
>>> The set of languages that are present in both data sets is
>>> af ar as ast bg bn bo bs ca cs cy da dz es et fa fr fur ga gd gl gu he
>>> hi hu id is it ja jbo ka kab kn ko ku lt lv ml mr my nb nl nn nr nso ny
>>> oc om or pap pl ps pt ru sc si sk so sq ss st sv ta te th tn tr ts ug
>>> uk uz ve vi xh zu
>>>
>>> Languages only in extras/l10n/ are:
>>> be-BY br brx de dgo el eo eu fi hr kid kk km kok ks ky mai mk mn mni ne
>>> pa-IN ro rw sa-IN sat sd sh sl sr sw-TZ tg
>>>
>>> Languages only on the pootle server are:
>>> pyg son tk tlh
>>>
>>> See [2] for a list of language ids. (tlh for example is klingon)
>>>
>>>
>>> So, we probably have to merge both data sets and hope for the best.
>>> Any information from people who know the localization process better is
>>> welcome.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andre
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~af/index.html
>>> [2] http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
>>
>>
>>
>> And what has happened to en-GB and en-ZA ?
>
>
> Ah, at least one person who reads my mails :-)
>
> I forgot to add the following languages as being present in both locations:
>    ca-XV en-GB en-ZA pt-BR zh-CN zh-TW
>
> Reason: These six language ids are written slightly differently on the
> pootle server (with a '_' (underline) in the middle) and in l10n/ (with a
> '-' (dash)).  I sorted them differently and then forgot about them. Sorry.

Thanks. And I too actually read your mail messages :-)--and deep
appreciate the work.

ciao
louis
>
> -Andre

Mime
View raw message