Re: organizing CVS for trans

[Noriko Mizumoto]

Hi Karsten-san and docs team

Thanks for your decision of having separate xml files per language!

As quality wise, I think it would be better to have proofreader
(maintainer) for each translation same way with software translation.

To avoid confliction committing same document file in same time by more
than one translators (or maintainer), access right should be restricted 
to the maintainer, I think.

Any thoughts? translators?

Btw, I discussed with Warren about this.
Ideally we'd better to have trans cvs repository apart from docs cvs.
There are several challenges to make this happen at the moment.

Cheers

Noriko

Karsten Wade wrote:
>  On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:03 +1000, Noriko Mizumoto wrote:
>  
> >Hi docs team
> >
> >I am coming from fedora-trans-list, Japanese translator, Noriko 
> >Mizumoto. I am so excited hearing the news that docs team is preparing 
> >to host translation. I would like to say thank you, and am looking for 
> >something that I can help. Please let me know if it is recommended to 
> >make self introduction as translator, I am most happy to do so.
>  
>  
>  That would be great to do.  If you have done it already, you could just
>  send us a link to that self-intro.
>  
>  
> >To me it would be nice if translators can work on po files similar to 
> >fedora software modules we are currently working, since this must be one 
> >of safe way to minimize translator from messing up tags. However this 
> >might be required more time of your side, I guess.
> >
> >When the format will go with inline, the file can only be translated by 
> >one translator at the time and other translators have to wait for 
> >her/his turn, if my understanding is correct.
> >Then it seems that this is not practical for release notes which has 
> >strictly limited time-frame for both docs and trans.
>  
>  
>  Yes, this is how the RHEL documentation is translated, with separate XML
>  files per language.
>  
>  Despite our geekish preference for translations all in one file, it is
>  clear we need to make them separate files.
>  
>  foo-en.xml
>  foo-it.xml
>  foo-ru.xml
>  foo-jp.xml
>  ...
>  
>  Should we want to combine then in the future, I bet there is some way to
>  do it in Perl.[1]
>  
>  - Karsten
>  [1] Isn't this true of everything?
>

organizing CVS for trans

[Aiet Kolkhi]

I agree. Coordinated approach is much more efficient and greatly
improves the overal quality of the translation, as well as glossary
and style consistency.

--
Aiet Kolkhi
http://www.Gakartuleba.org

On 8/29/05, Noriko Mizumoto <noriko(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hi Karsten-san and docs team
>  
>  Thanks for your decision of having separate xml files per language!
>  
>  As quality wise, I think it would be better to have proofreader
>  (maintainer) for each translation same way with software translation.
>  
>  To avoid confliction committing same document file in same time by more
>  than one translators (or maintainer), access right should be restricted
>  to the maintainer, I think.
>  
>  Any thoughts? translators?
>  
>  Btw, I discussed with Warren about this.
>  Ideally we'd better to have trans cvs repository apart from docs cvs.
>  There are several challenges to make this happen at the moment.
>  
>  Cheers
>  
>  Noriko
>  
>  Karsten Wade wrote:
>  > On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:03 +1000, Noriko Mizumoto wrote:
>  >
>  >>Hi docs team
>  >>
>  >>I am coming from fedora-trans-list, Japanese translator, Noriko
>  >>Mizumoto. I am so excited hearing the news that docs team is preparing
>  >>to host translation. I would like to say thank you, and am looking for
>  >>something that I can help. Please let me know if it is recommended to
>  >>make self introduction as translator, I am most happy to do so.
>  >
>  >
>  > That would be great to do.  If you have done it already, you could just
>  > send us a link to that self-intro.
>  >
>  >
>  >>To me it would be nice if translators can work on po files similar to
>  >>fedora software modules we are currently working, since this must be one
>  >>of safe way to minimize translator from messing up tags. However this
>  >>might be required more time of your side, I guess.
>  >>
>  >>When the format will go with inline, the file can only be translated by
>  >>one translator at the time and other translators have to wait for
>  >>her/his turn, if my understanding is correct.
>  >>Then it seems that this is not practical for release notes which has
>  >>strictly limited time-frame for both docs and trans.
>  >
>  >
>  > Yes, this is how the RHEL documentation is translated, with separate XML
>  > files per language.
>  >
>  > Despite our geekish preference for translations all in one file, it is
>  > clear we need to make them separate files.
>  >
>  > foo-en.xml
>  > foo-it.xml
>  > foo-ru.xml
>  > foo-jp.xml
>  > ...
>  >
>  > Should we want to combine then in the future, I bet there is some way to
>  > do it in Perl.[1]
>  >
>  > - Karsten
>  > [1] Isn't this true of everything?
>  >
>  
>  --
>  Fedora-trans-list mailing list
>  Fedora-trans-list(a)redhat.com
>  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-trans-list
>

organizing CVS for trans

[Karsten Wade]

On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 00:15 +0400, Aiet Kolkhi wrote:
>  I agree. Coordinated approach is much more efficient and greatly
>  improves the overal quality of the translation, as well as glossary
>  and style consistency. 
>  On 8/29/05, Noriko Mizumoto <noriko(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: 
>  > 
>  > To avoid confliction committing same document file in same time by more
>  > than one translators (or maintainer), access right should be restricted
>  > to the maintainer, I think. 
There is a timing concern here.

24 October is when the release notes freeze for translation.  By then,
if we do not have separate CVS and automated file-locking available
(Plan A), we will have to use Plan B:

** Plan B **

1. One or more translators from every language gets CVS access
to /cvs/docs.

2. Language teams need to coordinate who is translating what.  This is a
manual process.

3. Translations are put back into /cvs/docs/release-notes/ tree at the
same level as the *-en.xml file.

4. Everything that is in CVS by 31 October is shipped with the -en
version of the FC5 test1 relnotes.

5. It is OK if the translations are technically accurate but buggy
translations, they are test translations, not the final release.

Does this sound OK?

If so, please get your CVS access soon, to avoid the rush.  This page
explains what is needed for access:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/CvsUsage#cvsaccess

We can move the files around later and other CVS magic, when we need to.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/