On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:31:14AM +1000, Asgeir Frimannsson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Dimitris Glezos
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:36 AM, Ruediger Landmann
> <r.landmann(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Diego Búrigo Zacarão wrote:
>>> Can someone, please, tell me why all the Release Notes translations (PO
>>> files) were deleted?
>> They haven't been deleted; the po files for the Fedora 10 Release Notes
>> moved to a separate git branch as we prepare for Fedora 11. See here:
> May I suggest a heads-up to fedora-trans-list before landing big
> changes. It's always a good idea. =)
> Also, note that I'm still waiting for a patch that adds support for
> Publican documents for Transifex. Is there a plan behind this change
> in vital Fedora documents that takes translators into consideration?
As far as I understand publican, one of the major benefits of this
toolchain *is* translations. Hence, supporting Transifex on the
infrastructure side should be very easy. A simple recipe:
1) In the toplevel 'Makefile' read the OTHER_LANGS variable to get a
list of target-languages (e.g. ja-JP gu-IN)
2) For each of these languages, there is a sub-directory (e.g.
./ja-JP,/ ./gu-IN/) that reflects the exact directory-layout of the
./pot/ directory (containing the POT templates).
3) Present this nicely with statistics in the Transifex UI and allow
So, getting info out of publican is easy. The tricky part is that
Transifex 0.5 took a 'minor shortcut' by designing the application (at
least the UI) around the concept of 'one PO file pr component'. There
seems to be some support for additional files pr language, but this is
not a 'simple patch' and requires cooperation from the core
development team. I'm happy to assist with publican support if we find
a solution for multiple files in general within Transifex.
We have a Fedora L10N Infrastructure team meeting later today where I
will put this on the agenda.
From what I understood, this was not the case in Transifex 0.5, and it
does have some abstract notion of "data sets" that can encompass more
than one PO file for a particular module. In the same way, more than
one PO file for a particular collection can be parsed for statistics.
Am I correct about this? I thought I read this in the L10n
Infrastructure team meeting notes too, and that the changes needed
were not extraordinary.
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
- - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug