Transifex.net migration may lead to loss of our copyright headers
mhideo at redhat.com
Fri Feb 25 23:01:35 UTC 2011
Can a technical person with lovelock checked out grep through po files in all the langs in all the packages and assess how many people and how far back in time this change will impact? that should give us some scope and make a call whether it is convention or procedure.
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul W. Frields" <stickster at gmail.com>
> To: trans at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 6:09:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Transifex.net migration may lead to loss of our copyright headers
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 01:56:05PM -0300, Domingo Becker wrote:
> > 2011/2/25 Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com>:
> > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 07:15:00PM -0500, Manuel Eduardo Ospina
> > > Sarmiento wrote:
> > >> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Dimitris Glezos
> > >> > <glezos at indifex.com> wrote:
> > >> > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Ville-Pekka Vainio
> > >> > > <vpivaini at cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> > >> > >> It was brought to our attention by a Mageia translator on
> > >> > >> #fedora-l10n
> > >> > >> today, that the new version of Transifex does not leave the
> > >> > >> copyright
> > >> > >> headers in po files intact.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > FYI -- We are tracking the issue on this ticket (vpv already
> > >> > > added
> > >> > > some useful comments on it):
> > >> > >
> > >> > > http://trac.transifex.org/ticket/675
> > >> >
> > >> > Since that ticket is more generally about the treatment of
> > >> > comments, I
> > >> > didn't add this issue there, but for Fedora translations, are
> > >> > we able
> > >> > to ensure the copyright notice reads at a minimum, "Copyright
> > >> > (C)
> > >> > <year> Red Hat, Inc. and others"?
> > >>
> > >> Is this enough? will we lose the name of the translators that
> > >> have
> > >> worked since 1998 and put "others" instead?
> > >
> > > Sorry, I didn't mean to imply or express whether we'd lose
> > > anything or
> > > not. I simply wanted to point out the copyright notice itself
> > > should
> > > *at least* say that Red Hat is not the only copyright owner. It
> > > would
> > > be ideal if translators were all listed. As I understand it that
> > > listing would not be terribly difficult to add as a feature.
> > This has been discussed before  and , and it comes from 2006.
> > Let's talk about a long term solution for this, again.
> > It is useless to have comments that will be removed from the po file
> > by the po compiler. They will not be present in the rpm package nor
> > in
> > the published document (using publican).
> > The copyright message may be solved with a LICENSE file in the whole
> > project together with the source files in the source tree.
> > The translator history is another different story. It is used
> > sometimes by translators (although mostly not used), and, if it is
> > well implemented, it may serve for acknowledging translators for
> > their
> > work.
> > If I may choose here, I prefer a string like "translator-credits",
> > which end up in the application like they do in gpk-application or
> > system-config-printer, and the only translators shown are the ones
> > for
> > the current selected locale.
> > A po file editor like poEdit doesn't show the comments at the
> > beginning of the po file, one would need to open the .po file with
> > gedit to see them. However, all po file editor have a search tool,
> > and
> > a translator should only know what string to search for to see the
> > translation history and modify it accordingly.
> > With a document managed with publican, there might be a string like
> > that too, in a section like "<para>translator-credits</para>" in the
> > xml file for a chapter, just like the Colophon chapter/section Paul
> > once proposed . I saw it is possible to implement. I will ask
> > Guillermo Gomez (gomix) to implement it in the Software Management
> > Guide, just for the proof of concept.
> > So, the copyright message in a comment in a source file can be
> > solved
> > with a LICENSE file in the source tree, the same way it is done with
> > some Fedora packages where the license is missing in the source
> > code.
> > The translator history clearly needs a solution outside Tx. It only
> > needs developers and doc-writers care for the L10N people who will
> > contribute translating their work.
> > 
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2009-April/msg00174.html
> >  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue174#Document_Colophon
> > 
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2008-March/msg00132.html
> I heard jsmith say on IRC earlier today, but didn't see him post here
> about it, so apologies if this is old news. DocBook lets you use:
> <othercredit role="translator">Domingo Becker</othercredit>
> I haven't used Publican in a while now and it's been through several
> revisions. Does anyone know how it treats these entries, off the top
> of their head?
> I agree the hard work of translators should be recognized wherever
> 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
> trans mailing list
> trans at lists.fedoraproject.org
More information about the trans