Minutes from the Fedora L10N coordination meeting

Igor Pires Soares igorsoares at gmail.com
Sat Feb 19 14:17:58 UTC 2011

Em Sex, 2011-02-18 às 19:04 -0500, Jared K. Smith escreveu:
> In general, yes, one could argue that having Fedora being self-hosted
> from an infrastructure standpoint is better.  But we've also got to be
> open-minded enough to realize that each additional tool we add to our
> own infrastructure comes with a maintenance burden (or a technical
> debt, as some people prefer to call it).  One of my jobs as the Fedora
> Project Leader is to work with all the teams involved to help balance
> our wishes with our resources, and try to make the best decisions I
> can for Fedora as a whole.  In the case of the migration to
> Transifex.net, it's pretty clear that the advantages outweigh the
> risks.  Why can I say that so confidently?  It's because I've watched
> the Transifex team as they've developed the software, turned it into a
> small business, and continued to do the right thing.

>From the QA side I believe that migrating to Tx.n was a good move. The
instability of Fedora's Transifex instance could lead to problems when
submitting translations, making translators and developers frustrated
when a translation doesn't end in a final version or when a deadline is
missed. I'm also sure that new features offered by Tx.n will help the
translation community to do a better job, what means an operating system
with better translations.

>From my early experience on Fedora I realize that strong translation
communities means strong regional communities because people feel
supported and glad to use and contribute to Fedora in their mother
language. I have seen the great improvement made by the Transifex
developers during the years and how things got better if compared to my
early days as a translator. That´s why I'm also confident that we are
moving to the right direction now.

Igor Pires Soares
Fedora Ambassador (Brazil) - Member of FAmSCo
Fedora I18N/L10N QA

More information about the trans mailing list