On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, Asgeir Frimannsson wrote:
Thoughts and comments, all sorts of comments, are very welcome.
Please correct me if I'm reading this wrong but I see "transifex is great or close to it" and "here's how we're going to build our own solution anyway" ?
Yes, "Transifex is great and will continue to serve us".
BUT:
If you look at the state of the art in L10N outside the typical Linux projects where PO and Gettext rule, you'll notice we are very short on areas like:
- Translation Reuse
- Terminology Management
- Translation Workflow and Project Management
- Integration with CMSs.
- Richer Translation Tools
This is an effort in narrowing that gap, and I can't see that effort work by evolving an existing tool from this 'cultural background'. Yes, we can get some of the way by developing custom solutions for e.g. linking wikis to Transifex for CMS integration, or using e.g. Pootle for web-based translation. But we would still be limited to the core architecture of the intent of the original developers, which is something that would radically slow the project down.
That said, I am not talking down Transifex, and the fact that someone in the community has sacrificed a lot and done a great job in getting us this far within Fedora.
Correct me if I'm wrong though, instead of forking or adapting or working with upstream, you are talking about doing your own thing right?
-Mike