Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jogischmidt@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <508FF8C0.30002@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:56:48 +0100
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Schmidt?= <jogischmidt@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: proposal for new l10n workflow
References: 
 <CAK2iWdTs1dZjPTW=u9L0YqdLB74o7-yrNt3W0jvTtgnZwZcBKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5089A8A1.3000301@apache.org>
 <CAK2iWdSJY2WViJukOtrj0NpGCEUp8me--QGGr68cyhv5Fx6utQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <508FC6A3.1060304@gmail.com>
 <CAK2iWdT_9k=ZGgcEuEtn7Rjznz56qySRP=msOOrdrfXqyTD3xw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK2iWdR9OyLHYS9zL6JrRkCz0g4zBJrg4vccO_eYrf5Za0GPHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <508FD617.8080607@gmail.com>
 <CAK2iWdS3edGUKaeAd7-arbGeciAO5mX-rbD4Zgk4bCqmckFhsQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAK2iWdS3edGUKaeAd7-arbGeciAO5mX-rbD4Zgk4bCqmckFhsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 10/30/12 2:45 PM, jan iversen wrote:
> If my page needs updating, feel free to do so, I actually copied all the
> scripts things from the other page.

I see it now, I must have been blind earlier, sorry for the confusion

Juergen


> 
> jan.
> 
> On 30 October 2012 14:28, J�rgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/30/12 1:33 PM, jan iversen wrote:
>>> I just double checked:
>>>
>>> the pointer is: Localization
>>> AOO<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Localization_AOO>, which clearly
>>> stated (the very first lines of the document)
>>>
>>> "This document is based on and extents
>>> Localization_for_developers<
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Localization_for_developers>.
>>> The document is work in progress showing the result of a detailed
>> technical
>>> analysis of the current process (version 3.4.1) . As such this document
>>> should be seen as a replacement of
>>> Localization_for_developers<
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Localization_for_developers>
>>> ."
>>
>> I simply missed some basic info how the tools have to be used etc.. I
>> was confused...
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But I will happely remove it if you prefer, but then where do I put a
>> link
>>> to the more detailed description of the CURRENT process.
>>
>> no need to remove it now, I know whats behind and as long as nobody
>> delete it I am fine
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> jan.
>>>
>>> On 30 October 2012 13:30, jan iversen <jancasacondor@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am guilty.
>>>>
>>>> see below.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 30 October 2012 13:22, J�rgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/27/12 10:51 PM, jan iversen wrote:
>>>>>> Based on the comments I have received, I have updated the document.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The major changes are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - removed l10n web page tools
>>>>>> - no auto-commit in any tools
>>>>>> - proposed changes to pootle server (based on request from andrea, to
>>>>>> use/change existing tools)
>>>>>> - added more text on the translation workflow, inkl. local teams
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The document is available as pdf:
>>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/File:L10procNew2.pdf
>>>>>> and (due to a polite hint) as a wiki page:
>>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Localization_AOO/new_proposal
>>>>>> Furthermore a projectplan is available as a wiki page:
>>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Localization_AOO/workPlan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this mail is posted on both ooo-L10n and ooo-dev, but please use
>> ooo-dev
>>>>>> for discussions.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that somebody put an "outdated" template on
>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Localization_for_developers which I
>>>>> think is a little bit early.
>>>>>
>>>>> The new page is a great resource to discuss a new workflow and
>> necessary
>>>>> improvements. But the currently "Localization for developers" page
>>>>> describes how it works today.
>>>>>
>>>> The page it points to, is NOT the new proposal, that would be wrong, but
>>>> the first I made with a more detailed description of how it works today.
>>>>
>>>> I hope that is ok ?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We should avoid confusion here, the new process is under development
>> yet
>>>>> but not available yet.
>>>>>
>>>> I totally agree, and I have not made links that suggest otherwise.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Juergen
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrea:
>>>>>> I hope you have time to see if your suggestions are well represented
>>>>> now,
>>>>>> so this document could be used as discussion basis when you meet the
>>>>> pootle
>>>>>> people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have a nice evening.
>>>>>> jan I.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>