Re: l10n for clutter

[Dimitris Glezos <glezos indifex com>]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Petr Kovar <pmkovar gnome org> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Dimitris Glezos <glezos indifex com>, Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:03:56 +0300:
>
> (...)
>
>> Tao, I think you're 100% right that certain projects and translators
>> would prefer having a more "global" system of translation teams.
>> That's why projects such as GNOME, Fedora and others have such a
>> strong L10n community. These were the communities we had in mind when
>> adding the support for "Project Team Re-using/Outsourcing", giving the
>> choice to developers to choose this model. Additionally, for some
>> other upstream projects, having an upstream team might make more
>> sense.
>
> This seems to be quite a recurring issue, for what it's worth, since we've
> had this (or similar) discussion before. The support for "Project Team
> Re-using/Outsourcing" is surely an improvement in the current Transifex
> implementation, so thanks for that, but from a translation community
> perspective, I'm afraid it's still quite missing a point.
>
> I think that community-empowered l10n infrastructure should be built upon a
> paradigm that by default stress out the need for creating and/or
> facilitating per-translation-team-based global translation community. I
> believe that's the only effective way to do [community] translations in the
> FLOSS world.

Every time I tried thinking how this could scale to thousands of
projects with different release cycles, while keeping some kind of
quality control in place, I failed miserably. Ideas are welcome! =)

-d



-- 
Dimitris Glezos

Transifex: The Multilingual Publishing Revolution
http://www.transifex.net/ -- http://www.indifex.com/