Inputs required for move to Transifex.net

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:32:57AM +0100, giallu at gmail.com wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Mike Hideo <mhideo at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 02/09/2011 03:51 PM, Runa Bhattacharjee wrote:
> >> The Fedora Infrastructure team has proposed[1] to move the Fedora Translation
> >> infrastructure to transifex.net. They would be discussing this further in
> >> their next meeting and are looking for inputs from FLP members to fully
> >> understand the implications of such a move. Please do let them know if you have
> >> any feedback about the matter.
> >>
> >
> > What about the Fedora brand?
> 
> OT here, but I'm also worried that transifex will be essentially not
> maintained in Fedora repos anymore as a result of the move

I think that would be a really unfortunate situation, too.  However,
we need to consider that *every* package in Fedora could be
potentially at the same risk.  If the person(s) maintaining it are
only doing so for a very specific purpose, and that purpose goes away,
the package ends up at risk of rotting or removal.

This is one reason why we've always campaigned to have wider
co-maintenance of packages.  Co-maintenance prevents packaging from
having a single point of failure or from becoming a "vanity" project.
By "vanity," of course I don't mean that the transifex packagers are
maintaining the package because they're vain -- quite the opposite!
But if the only reason transifex is in the Fedora repo is so Fedora
can use it, ultimately the packaging effort may not scale well.

Packaging is always open to contributors and I'd invite interested
people to get in touch with the current maintainers to help.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
          Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com