incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jan iversen <jancasacon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [RELEASE] Releasing new languages for 3.4.1
Date Fri, 26 Oct 2012 18:03:42 GMT
just two small comments.

have a nice weekend.
Jan.

On 26 October 2012 19:43, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:

> Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> 1) release new languages via lang packs only for now
>> 2) release full installs, but for only these new languages
>>
>
> I don't see a big difference between a langpack and a full install in this
> case, so I'd go for full installs, unless releasing langpacks helps in
> communicating that these are "late" additions and that full installs will
> come with the next release.
>
>
>  Can we really skip the release process?  PO files == source, right?
>>
>
> Yes, not exactly but quite (PO files are not taken verbatim into source,
> but they are imported and influence resource files which are in the source
> tree).
>
>
>  Maybe a question for legal-discuss if we're not certain.
>>
>
> If in the end we have consensus on releasing new languages for 3.4.1
> instead of making a new release, indeed we will ask.
>
>
>  How do we want to handle this on an ongoing basis?  New point release
>> for every new language?  Every 5 new languages?  It is certainly good
>> for volunteers to get the encouragement of a fast turnaround for their
>> work.  But this is the same for a C++ programmer.
>>
>
> There are big differences here, that are also the reason for me to
> consider releasing these new languages as soon as possible:
> - A translation is often done by a team; if we can publish it immediately,
> the team can the be involved in other activities like revamping the N-L
> website, local promotion and so on; if we wait too much, we risk to have no
> volunteers for the following release.
> - Releasing a new language is totally risk-free: a new language can't
> break functionality in OpenOffice, while any feature could have bugs and
> needs more qualified testing.

I do not agree to that statement for two reasons
- a bad translations will influence the reputation of AOO in that language
zone.
- Wrong translation of e.g. accelerators, might not break the product
technically speaking, but for sure the end-user will experience it as
non-functioning.

>
>
>  In the end, I wonder whether the best solution is to get into a steady
>> release cycle of quarterly releases (every 3 or 4 months)?
>>
>
> This could be a solution too. In this case we would have the problem of
> choosing what to translate (3.4 or 3.5? probably we would ask new
> volunteers to focus on strings that will be in the next release, even
> though they aren't frozen yet).
>
- I think it would be nice to give translators an early start possibility,
giving them a choice of working late after freeze or taking parts now with
the risk that new messages are added. In my experience the risk for changed
messages are relatively low.

>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message