Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 08:00:14AM +1000, Bernd Groh wrote:
>>I also have problems like that, or I have committed changes for 3 files
>>yesterday, but the changes do not show up in the stats, and I get email
>>that I have not committed anything and the files will be released.
>>I reported it to red Hat, and they say that it is fixed, but then it
>>happened again yesterday. When I committed to the cvs it reported
>>everything fine and dandy.
>Our apologies, it seems we have messed up some things with the switch
>from redhat-config-* to system-config-*.
It was not just that file, but 3 files in total. And before that
it was also more than 1 file. I just had a look at the status page, and
my latest 3 commits are still not reflected there, although the cvs
commit reported everything done. I am just worried if my translations
will make it for FC3.
I've checked, and the status pages reflect the cvs. There are still 3
packages with missing translations, anaconda (2+5), authconfig (4+0),
and system-config-users (1+1). :( I've also checked anaconda, and your
last commit to anaconda seems to be the 23rd? And you didn't get any
error messages on commit? Is anyone else experiencing such problems?
>>Another problem I have is that I have an error that I would
>>correct in a fully translated file, but there is no way to take it, and
>>I cannot committ, I dont have the privileges.
>If the file is fully translated, and you are a registered translator for
>that locale, you do have cvs access for this file, as such, you do have
>the privileges. We chose to do it this way for the first release, since
>the probability of concurrent commits is relatively low. The status
>pages were mainly implemented to address this very problem.
Hmm, it may be because I changed my account on the i18n site,
it is now keldsim. Can you verify to me that I have privileges to the
At the moment, you should be able to commit to every danish file, at
least as far as the status system is concerned.
>>I do have my reservations about the new translation system. I
>>that it can prevent some double translation, but in my experience that
>>is a very minor problem, and the extra burden on translators, to go
>>to a web interface and take/check out files individually, and the errors
>>that are likely to happen, like the ones I described above, and possibly
>>others may well overweight the bonus of avoiding double translations.
>I believe this is directly related to the size of a translation team. If
>you've primarily worked in smaller translation teams, then I do agree
>with your sentiment. I do have my reservations about the new system too.
>I've once suggested on this very list that we could build an exclude
>list, and allow smaller teams (or teams with such preference) to be
>excluded from the process, as such, every translator of that locale
>would be able to commit at any time, just as it was before the new
>system was implemented. I'm happy to put it up for discussion again,
>since there wasn't much feedback to this suggestion. One thing I have to
>say though, while I do have my reservations about the new system, I,
>personally, do very much prefer it over the system that was in place
I think that for my language this would be fine. The team is pretty
small (one not-so-small person:-)
Agreed. I'll add an option for the next upgrade.