Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F72B478.2010100@googlemail.com>
References: <4F72097A.6050609@googlemail.com>
	<4F7242A9.8090200@apache.org>
	<4F72B478.2010100@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:45:00 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAP-ksojPwwQYqpdk5JA75PHCHguKnFCgO4i2PsDijAdE6pVuaA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042fd940c662fb04bc4cf93b

--f46d042fd940c662fb04bc4cf93b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:49 AM, J=C3=BCrgen Schmidt
<jogischmidt@googlemail.com>wrote:

> Hi Andrea,
>
>
> On 3/28/12 12:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> J=C3=BCrgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>>  UI
>>> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
>>> for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like
>>> for "ru")
>>> HELP
>>> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
>>> >95%.
>>>
>>
>> These figures seem very high, we usually required > 80% (both UI and
>> Help), see http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Languages<http://w=
iki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Languages>
>>
>>
> thanks for this feedback, I wasn't aware of this numbers and it seems tha=
t
> my own expectations are higher than what we had before. I am open for tha=
t
> and we can reduce the numbers but doesn't it make sense to have 100% for =
UI
> and a lower number like the 80-85% for help. Help is not so important fro=
m
> my point view (who never used help and preferred google) but I think the =
UI
> should be complete.
>
> I am eager to learn from others and their experience and we should define
> together some boundaries for the future.
>
>
>
Some things to consider:

- What does the brand "OpenOffice" represent?  What does it mean to the
user? If we think it mean (among other things) "quality" and "good
localization support", then there are limits to what we can release and not
harm the brand identity.  For example, we cannot release a French
translation that is only 10% done.  It is all about meeting user
expectations.  Current OOo users have expectations.  And people who have
never used OpenOffice also have expectations.

- Instead of holding back partial translations, one approach would be to
label them in a special way, so we are setting accurate user expectations.
For example, complete translations might be called "gold", 90% translations
"silver" and 80% "bronze".  Less than 80% might be "beta" releases only.
Or some other similar naming schema.  This guides the user what to expect,
but also may attract help for the translations on where their help is most
needed.

-Rob


>  And, now that https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=3D118895<h=
ttps://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=3D118895>is
>> fixed (thanks!) the Italian version, even if at 95%-99%, would
>> definitely be ready to ship. We will reach 100% anyway (Paolo knows more
>> but there are more than a dozen vounteers so it won't be a problem for
>> us), but I'm speaking in general: excluding a language at 95%-99%
>> wouldn't make sense.
>>
>> If there are concerns about problems in the translation process/data,
>> then I'd prefer to distribute only builds for which we can identify a
>> volunteer who takes care of testing that the translation is OK in the
>> common use cases.
>>
>
> Exactly that is what I have in mind we will only ship languages where
> volunteers have shown up so far.
>
> Juergen
>

--f46d042fd940c662fb04bc4cf93b--