Re: Persian translations (was Fwd: Re: [farsi] Farsi encodingstandard)

[Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh sharif edu>]

> I really hate this kind of discussion but unfortunately I forced to do it by 
> some unserious guys that jumped in as coordinators for freeware projects.

I can't comment on other people, but I consider myself serious in
Persian localization matters (provable by googling). I also consider
this wording of yours offensive. Please be productive in a technical
discussion list, instead of calling people names.

> Take a look at KDE, Mozilla and Linux Translation project. All coordinators 
> for these projects are your friends

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Arash Zeini (KDE Persian tranlation
coordinator) is definitely not a friend of mine. I also don't know
Mohsen Sajjadi (one of Mozilla's coordinators) at all.

> and I have had the same discussion with 
> all them. I do not know what you get out of it if it is not personal 
> benefit.

I personally don't get anything out of GNOME Persian translation
project, at least until someone approaches me and pays me for the
sabotage I'm currently doing ;)

> >BTW, I consider your wording of "connect it with his/her carrier of line
> >of job" offensive.
> 
> Whatever the reasons are that you are hindering the project of progress is 
> not acceptable anymore!

Well, I see that you don't believe me. What can I do to prove my
intention?

> >I agree. The point is that reviewing them has been impossible since the
> >original glossary the Persian team compiled is out of synch with the
> >Persian Academy's computer terms list (which is required by law to be
> >used in Iran). I have been putting some efforts into discussions with
> >representatives from the Academy to get the list updated. In the
> >meanwhile, do you think it's sane to review everything twice?
> 
> Any SANE person understand that reviewing is the backbone of any dynamic 
> project which updates once or twice in a year.

Perhaps I'm not making myself understood. We are very close to getting
an official updated list from the Academy. And I consider this double
review not to be worth the time, also since a Persian desktop is not
usable in the current form of GNOME, where Pango's and GTK+'s support
for Persian is still cooking.

Still, I'll review your translations if you feel it's required. (But
please, don't you see the point?)

> Gnome is NOT a product of IRANIAN goverment that Iranian law should apply to 
> it.

That law doesn't apply to "products of the Iranian government", nor am I
an employee of the Iranian government. That law applies to *all*
official governmental communications (which is an issue if we want to
see the Iranian government use GNOME) and all *products* of private
companies. I guess GNOME can be called a product of anybody that
redistributes GNOME in Iran.

> The work around is that some other Persian speaking outside of the country 
> take over the coordinator role. Then, you will not face any legal action 
> against you. Let those law apply to those software that in fact produce 
> within the countrys boarer and not others!!!

I'll face legal action first time I start to distribute GNOME inside
Iran. In the probable case that no wants to sue me for the work I do in
my free time, many companies and institutions in Iran won't be able to
deploy GNOME because of the choice they have: they'll go for the
properietary solution if that is conforming with the Academy's
requirements.

So in short, you're recommending: let's conspirate and translate for
ourselves, instead of doing it for the user base.

roozbeh