Re: State of Farsi Gnome translation

[Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh gmail com>]

Peter,

I don't think the problem is lack of activity from my side. The
problem is that almost all previous contributors who had experience
with Persian translaiton of GNOME have stopped contributing, so we
don't have any reviewers at the moment. Translation updates stay
there, and I can not convince anybody to review them. (BTW, as far as
I remember, some of the people contributing did not use the GNOME
glossary at all, and some of the open bugs does not wait an action
from a reviewer, but an update from the translator to match existing
GNOME style. It may only say that on one bug per translator, but
that's the story.)

I've never seen your Persian translations, but maybe you can help us
(and show your skills) by reviewing existing Persian translation bugs
and see if it's good Persian and if they match the current glossary
and style used in the existing translations. You know the open bugs. I
would appreciate that.

Alternatively, you can translate parts of GNOME that you care for, and
attach them to bugs, so someone can review them. (Considering the
present situation in Iran now, that may take a while. Anybody who may
volunteer his time to translate is doing something related to the
uprising, from translating news to translating privacy-related
software.)

Independently, I would gladly hand over the role of coordinator if
somebody with the necessary skills and experience agrees to step in. I
at least know two such people, but they seem to have left the project
too, like every other experienced translator/editor. Mine is a role I
accepted out of a necessity years ago, and I believe I have
overstayed. Just help recreate a community with a couple of active
reviewers who know techincal Persian well enough, and you've shown you
can do it.

Roozbeh

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Peter von Kaehne<refdoc crosswire org> wrote:
> Just to be clear, I am not intending to form or represent a different group,
> nor do I want to remove/act against/fight for coordinatorship. I have read
> that thread last year and feel appalled by it and the approach taken by the
> complainant.
>
>
> I am here essentially to resolve our problem at Xiphos (+ help the overall
> effort along). Roozbeh is a vastly superior translator, software engineer
> (which I am not) and someone I respect highly from different and unrelated
> matters. If this thread wakes him up and allows me to address my problems in
> Xiphos then all is fine.
>
>
> But if he has left/become inactive then I am looking for a resolution of
> some sort + look to you for guidance in this matter.
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
> Christian Rose wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/09, Refdoc <refdoc crosswire org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  Refdoc wrote:
>>>  > Hi,
>>>  >
>>>  > I am Peter von Kaehne, a developer in CrossWire Bible Society (open
>>>  > source cross platform Bible software project) and Farsi translator of
>>>  > Xiphos (formerly GnomeSword - a Gnome/GTK based frontend to
>>> Crosswire's
>>>  > offerings).
>>>  >
>>>  > Xiphos relies in parts on translations coming from central Gnome
>>> related
>>>  > libraries.
>>>  >
>>>  > Over the last year or so I have noticed that these centrally provided
>>>  > translations suffering quite a bit under bit-rot and this is now
>>>  > affecting us as a project quite badly as central items like "quit" etc
>>>  > are not anymore covered.
>>>  >
>>>  > Looking at the translation statistics
>>>  >
>>>  > http://l10n.gnome.org/languages/fa/gnome-2-28/ui/
>>>  >
>>>  > and
>>>  >
>>>  > http://l10n.gnome.org/teams/fa
>>>  >
>>>  > it is clear that the current state is not good and that there is
>>> steady
>>>  > decline over the last couple of years.
>>>  >
>>>  > Looking at the steadiness of the decline, the large number of fuzzy
>>>  > terms, the list of open bugs, the number of patches submitted
>>> (sometimes
>>>  > complete new po files), the lack of review, the number of pings by
>>> Andre
>>>  > Klapper  and the date of most of these (nearly all in 2008) I am not
>>>  > sure if there is any action at the moment.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=l10n&component=Persian%20[fa]&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED
>>>  >
>>>  > I have tried several times in 2008 and 2009 to contact Roozbeh
>>> directly
>>>  > (never yet on this mailing list) about matters of Farsi translation,
>>>  > lists of approved words etc but got no response. I am not even anymore
>>>  > sure that the email addresses publicly listed are those which are
>>>  > currently still active.
>>>  >
>>>  > I most certainly do not want to kickstart a new round of the rather
>>>  > upsetting thread from last year on this very subject
>>>  >
>>>  > http://www.mail-archive.com/gnome-i18n gnome org/msg09525.html
>>>  >
>>>  > , but am wondering what I can do about the matter.
>>>  >
>>>  > Personally I would like to get the various underlying libraries
>>> updated.
>>>  > I believe that the even going through the "fuzzy" translations and
>>>  > "unfuzzying" things which are clear cut, would improve the state of
>>>  > affairs enormously.
>>>  >
>>>  > I am not even remotely as accomplished a translator as many
>>> contributors
>>>  > here in the past, but in the light of current and lasting inactivity I
>>>  > would rather step up to the mark and deliver something potentially
>>>  > incomplete and buggy, then leaving things as they are right now. My
>>>  > personal experience with these matters is that producing
>>>  > something/anything in such sensitive areas as translations is often
>>>  > enough to get others, better qualified but less motivated into action.
>>>  > The embarassement of buggy translations is just too big to keep shtum
>>> :-)
>>>  >
>>>  > So, what is it I am asking for?
>>>  >
>>>  > I would like to get direct write access to the translations for the
>>>  > underlying libraries. I intend to limit myself to the matters most
>>>  > concerning to my own projects and to refrain from doing anything
>>>  > controversial. I most certainly would not touch the stuff causing so
>>>  > much aggro last year. I am willing to work closely under some sort of
>>>  > guidance/mentoring scheme/coordinator/whatever. I would also
>>> relinquish
>>>  > my write access immediately once it becomes obvious that I can not
>>> keep
>>>  > up with the relevant commitment. As I am an unknown here on Gnome I
>>> can
>>>  > understand if this is asking for too much, but I do ask you to
>>> consider
>>>  > this please anyway, in the light of the obviuous decline of Farsi
>>> Gnome.
>>>  >
>>>  > If Roozbeh re-emerges and starts doing things (now or later) I would
>>>  > obviously immediately cease working independently and submit to his
>>>  > guidance in things (or indeed withdraw completely) as he is a much
>>> much
>>>  > better translator that I can ever hope to be.
>>>  >
>>>  > Karl Kleinpaste, the lead developer from Xiphos (karl kleinpaste org)
>>>  > can provide a reference for me in terms of my working practices,
>>>  > willingness to work in a team and subject to authority etc. Any
>>> passing
>>>  > Iranian can obviously have a look at xiphos and see if they are deeply
>>>  > dissatisfied with its translation into Farsi.
>>>  >
>>>  > yours
>>>  >
>>>  > Peter
>>>
>>> Seeing the response on the related subject in the Esperanto thread, I
>>>  may have been presumptuous to request write access, but I would like to
>>>  see some way of resolving this deadlock.
>>>
>>>  Any suggestions welcome.
>>>
>>>  Thanks!
>>>
>>>  Peter
>>>
>>
>> The coordinatorship issue must be resolved first. Only then accounts
>> can be created.
>>
>> Providing different "groups" with perhaps different policies or
>> agendas different accounts and having a fight in the VCS is *not* the
>> way to solve a team problem. That's why we have a strict policy that
>> the language team coordinator must approve of new accounts. If that
>> does not work, then we will have to have a discussion about the
>> coordinatorship of the team and resolve that first.
>>
>> Roozbeh, comments?
>>
>>
>> Christian
>>
>
>