| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Easing software localization with TransifexEasing software localization with TransifexPosted Mar 26, 2009 15:15 UTC (Thu) by hmh (subscriber, #3838)In reply to: Easing software localization with Transifex by danilo Parent article: Easing software localization with Transifex
First of, you are talking about Ubuntu translations in Rosetta, not about any translations in Rosetta. I don't know about others, but I certainly mean only translations to upstream software (i.e. stuff that would be useful outside of Ubuntu)... Next, if Canonical is to push translations upstream "proactively" (i.e. somebody with no knowledge of all the languages that Rosetta contains translations for would go to hundreds of upstream projects times the number of translation teams, and send them the translations), we'd get even more bad press because we are submitting them the work they are not asking for. You just submit it once, or maybe once every year, with a pointer to a system very much like the one you have for packages derived from Debian, where the upstream maintainer can subscribe to update notices for translations? It is not that hard a problem to solve. In fact, you probably already have something like this. Then you track the use of this system, and you can produce hard numbers if anyone says translations to upstream material "get lost" inside of Rosetta. We're actively encouraging Ubuntu translators to work with upstreams (and we are providing tools to help with that collaboration), but we simply don't have resources to learn all the languages and have people talk to a thousand different upstream translation teams. Fair enough. But that wouldn't make the (maybe unfair) idea that "translations made in Rosetta end up not spreading upstream and to others" any less true, should it be true at all.
(Log in to post comments)
Easing software localization with Transifex Posted Mar 26, 2009 16:26 UTC (Thu) by danilo (guest, #57549) [Link] Fair enough. But that wouldn't make the (maybe unfair) idea that "translations made in Rosetta end up not spreading upstream and to others" any less true, should it be true at all. If you modify that statement to say: "translations made in _Ubuntu_ end up not spreading upstream and to others", I might agree. Rosetta is a tool to organize a translation effort. It allows one to keep track of changes between upstream, and also to only download such changes. Ubuntu has had a lot of problems with how their translation effort is organized, but that's being actively worked on, and I am sure will hugely improve in the next few months. Translations that are eg. done in-house in RedHat and/or SuSE do not go anywhere either (I know they did that in the past, not sure what they do today). They just don't have a public service like Launchpad where such translations are easily accessible and visible to everyone. Openness is sometimes a two-edged sword, but I'd always go for openness and visibility. And I am not saying that there are not improvements that we can make. But, this has nothing to do with comparing it to Transifex, where Transifex has full control of upstream translations. There are very successful Launchpad examples where projects directly host their translations in Launchpad. They are, naturally, neither outdated nor have any problems with syncing. And after you go past syncing, Transifex is definitely not a competitor to Launchpad Translations (eg. Pootle is much more suitable to be in the same sentence). Cheers,
Easing software localization with Transifex Posted Mar 27, 2009 1:12 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
"Translations that are eg. done in-house in RedHat and/or SuSE do not go anywhere either (I know they did that in the past, not sure what they do today)."
Red Hat makes a strong effort to push all translations upstream. If you have seen anything that suggests otherwise, do let me know. Grand claims without references aren't very helpful.
|
|
||||||||||||