Re: Using two translation workflows for one module

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 10:03 +0200, Debarshi Ray wrote:
> > Noted.
> > I have launched a thread on gnome-infrastructure [1] to ask if this
> > choice is acceptable for the GNOME community.
> 
> Wonderful. You started by asking me about my choice and now when you
> did not like it, you are trying other means to "win"!.

Hi Debarshi,

There is no need to be so hostile.  You feel that Claude
is going over your head to remove your options of tools.
I understand your frustration, but I think you've jumped
too quickly in trying to defend your work.  I can tell
you that Claude is one of the nicest people I've worked
with in Gnome over the years, and he's not out to make
developers' lives harder.

Please understand that there is a long-standing implicit
assumption that anything hosted on (cvs|svn|git).gnome.org
uses the Gnome translation teams.  I don't know if that's
actually written down anywhere, but it's always been my
understanding.  And I've maintained quite a few packages
on gnome.org.

I didn't read Claude's email as "you can't use Transifex"
but rather "we need to have a discussion to decide what
external tools are allowed".  Other translators on this
list have pointed out the difficulties of dealing with
translations imported from external sources.  But as you
mention, some Gnome translators use Transifex anyway.

You point out that with Git, translations could come in
from different sources anyway.  This is absolutely true.
I suppose we expect anybody pushing commits to gnome.org
to know what they're pushing, and to respect our teams.
But with distributed version control and federated tools
like Transifex, questions like these arise, and I don't
know that we've figured out how to answer them yet.

It's a discussion our community needs to have.

Thanks for you understanding,
Shaun