Annoucement: New translation status page is installed
Youcef Rabah Rahal
rahal at arabeyes.org
Fri Jun 25 10:43:56 UTC 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday 25 June 2004 12:05, Bernd Groh wrote:
> you're kidding, right?
A statement like the previous one does conflict with the idea I have of a
constructive and professional discussion.
> >Not sure this is consistent with the rest. How do you define the 'right'
> >terminology if there's no precise framework ? Why should someone be
> > prevented from translation if his translations are correct yet using
> > another terminology ?
> Wasn't your voice one of the loudest raising the issue of consistency?
> Since I believe that the comments made concerning consistency are very
> valid, I am suggesting solutions on how some of the problems can be
> handled with the given system. If you don't think someone should be
> prevented from doing translations that are correct, but inconsistent
> with everything else, what exactly were you on about previously?
I am still defending consistency and team work. I simply say that refusing
access to someone who is doing _correct_ translations but with a different
terminology than a group who is working on the same language, is not coherent
with _your_ previous statements and the new system. And hence the
inconsistence in the system itself.
> >Yes. A translation community can indeed function very well without having
> > an established team and/or maintainer and this is proven everyday.
> > However, when there are teams in place, they need to be considered.
> Yes, and I believe they are. If a coordinator of an active community (as
> in the group of people having the common interest of wanting to
> translate Fedora into their language, including "newer" translators) who
> has the support of most of the members of that language group requests
> to be a maintainer, this request is not denied.
What if the members of that language are simply not subscribed to this
list ? ;) I sent an email to i18n at redhat.com 2 days ago and didn't get any
answer about my application to be a maintainer.
> >A question: this new system has been installed after a request from the
> >community, right ? How come many (if not all ?) people on this list are
> >surprised ? ;) I don't remember a post on this list introducing the new
> >system nor someone posting to request it ? Or are you referring to another
> >'community' ?
> >Some URLs would help. Sorry if I missed something.
> Please, don't you think you're going a little off track here? Is that
> your idea of constructive criticism, or are you simply on some kind of
> mission now? Why do you ask me? Why don't you ask the people suggesting
> to lock files to disallow two translators from comitting at the same
> time, since that's the main thing that's new. And I still believe their
> reasoning to be very valid.
Not off track, sorry. This is a _natural_ question. You stated previously that
the new system was suggested by the community ? Nobody seemed to question
that though many of the posts (if not all) I read note that their authors are
rather suprised by the new system.
Again, as this new system simply conflicts with what was already in place,
with what other projects do, and with what we (as translators) have been
familiar with (until two days ago), I'm simply asking, when, by who, and
where this request was made ? What community are you referring to ? As far as
I know, people interested by Fedora translation (the community) are
subscribed to this list, yet I never read any reference about this subject.
Should we be subscribed to some other list ?
It shouldn't take long to answer these questions. A URL should not be hard to
paste. If you want me to accept something, please explain it to me first...
I'm not asking more than how things really happened. If I missed something
than please remind me by pointing me to the right place.
PS: You can add that to _constructive critisism_ of communication among the
Fedora community. If you call for critics, but you can't accept them, then,
Youcef R. Rahal
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the trans