John Poelstra さんは書きました:
John J. McDonough said the following on 07/28/2009 04:37 AM Pacific
> Thank you so much for your careful review
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noriko Mizumoto"
> To: "Fedora Translation Project List" <fedora-trans-list(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: <fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 12:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Release Notes Schedule
>> * 4.7 Translate f-r-n for beta Sep 6 to Sep 26 21d
>> This seems not consistent with f-12-trans-tasks, which says Sep 9 to
>> Sep 18.
> While I stuck with John's dates for the releases, I tried to maximize
> the time L10N had available. I wonder whether 9 days is sufficient. I
> would expect this cycle that the beta would be the bulk of the
> release notes (although I suppose that remains to be seen).
>> * 4.8 Build f-r-n.rpm for beta Sep 29
>> A question, there is 2 days blank between 4.7 and 4.8. What is this
> No good reason
>> * 6.7 Translate f-r-n for GA Oct 20 to Oct 26 7d
>> This seems not consistent with f-12-trans-tasks, which says Oct 9 to
>> Oct 16.
> The later we can do this the better. Release notes seem to be the
> last thing on people's radar, and we tend to discover important
> changes late, so the later we can make the POTs the better. Also, the
> original schedule had some Docs tasks out of order.
>> * Review translation not scheduled
>> Please set up 'Review translation'. Since we translate PO file, so
>> it is extremely helpful if docs team can build html for review
>> before the deadline.
> That is a really excellent catch. I think we need to work on the
> mechanics of this, but it could have a number of advantages.
>> * 7.4 Translate 0-day
>> I understand that docs team has little window for Zero Day Update.
>> But let me become devil this time as experiment. Is any chance that
>> rel-note team can place this entry before GA Public Availability
>> 3-Nov for inclusion? Just tiny window is fine. I can not guarantee
>> at all how many translators can respond.
> My expectation was that on release day the 0-day changes would be
> available in English only, with an update rpm to follow the release.
> However, we are still discussing whether it makes sense to have a
> single rpm with six documents in 41 languages, so that may change. It
> might make more sense to delay the availability of the update rpm
> rather than try to push the POT creation earlier, thus missing late
> breaking changes. On the other end, we are going to try to be more
> proactive in hounding the developers for release notes input, so
> maybe we can reduce the number of those late changes.
This is a great discussion and it is really exciting to see different
people asking the hard questions and looking for the holes that I used
to try and do all on my own :)
Unfortunately I've found that it is extremely hard (as you may be
seeing already) to create a really solid schedule over email,
particularly when more than one team is involved and questions have
been raised in response to tasks or dates someone has previously
I would like to propose that we meet on Gobby & FedoraTalk next. So
far I have met with: Design, Release Engineering, Quality, and
Marketing to go over the Fedora 12 schedule this way. I think everyone
who attended those meetings would say they were tremendously efficient
and helpful :-)
I am not good at those at all, but will try. Btw, irc is better
for me ;p
Could someone set up a meeting time and date using www.whenisgood.net?
I promise to add my availability and create a text version of the
existing schedule that we can then hack through and update together on
Gobby. It helps if I am there so I can capture the dependencies
between the tasks and embed them in the TaskJuggler source file.