Re: Complaint of the Slovak coordinator

[Laco Gubík <lacogubik gmail com>]

Hi Johannes

As it is almost two weeks from your last email, I would like to ask
whether you have come to any conclusion, or if not when do you think
you will decide?

Kind regards

Laco

On 18 May 2010 08:59,  <jhs jsschmid de> wrote:
> Hi Marcel!
>
> Thanks for your answer. I disagree with some points but that's perfectly
> ok. After rereading my mail it sounded a bit personal and I want to
> apologies for that as that wasn't my intention. Also thanks for
> summarizing the content of the slovak page.
>
> To all: The GTP coordination team is carefully discussing this matter and
> will decide soon whether we take any action and what that might be. In the
> meantime, unless you have something really new I don't think it's worth to
> extent this discussion further.
>
> So, everbody calm down a bit, do your work (that's actually what will
> improve the translation status most) and you will hear from us.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Johannes
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 01:19:11AM +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> > That's true. But if you have users, it does not automatically mean
>>> > you'll have bug reports. Yes, you'll get some of them but it is not
>>> > clear if it would be enough. From the past I know most of translation
>>> > bugs we found were found during the translation update by translators
>>> or
>>> > during the review. Our user base is far smaller than German or even
>>> > Czech.
>>>
>>> Note that this is not about the major things (because they will be
>>> resolved during review) but about some remaining issues where
>>> translators might have had a wrong thought. And people file more bug
>>> reports than you think.
>>
>> It really depends.
>>
>> In most cases users are not able to find minor bugs easily. If the
>> translated string looks reasonable but it is incorrect, the user will be
>> hardly able to find the problem. In most cases to find the minor bug you
>> need to compare the English original with the translated sentence.  This
>> is not a task most users do.
>>
>> If it was not easy for translator/reviewer to find the minor bug I do
>> not believe the bug will be found/reported by an average user.
>>
>> The minor bugs can be find only by hard work in the translation team.
>>
>>>
>>> > > there won't be any users and thus no bug reports. So, I would
>>> encourage
>>> > > you to drop the final review stage (now).
>>> >
>>> > To have this done I would have to set up more strict rules to become a
>>> > reviewer. I opted for different approach: to allow all members to try
>>> to
>>> > do the reviewer's job to see how it will go.
>>> >
>>> > This allows us to catch at least some bugs by current reviewers. And
>>> > this brings up a chance for potential good reviewer to show and
>>> improve
>>> > his work. In case I would allow to review only members to whom I can
>>> > trust the proces would slow down even more.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I see a big problem here. You seem to trust very few people and
>>> this will cause problems in an open-source projects. You simply need to
>>> trust that people are willing to do good work and they will improve over
>>> time.
>>
>> I review their work. My trust is based on observation.
>>
>>>
>>> > This is not like launchpad. I agree. But the difference is not very
>>> big.
>>> > To have started a translation you just need to register to the Damned
>>> > Lies, join the team, reserve for translation and submit a po file. You
>>> > can do it in few minutes. I do not know how launchpad works, but I
>>> think
>>> > it would be similar easy.
>>>
>>> Yeah, but you have a po file then. That's great as it brings you a
>>> translation for free if the person joins the team or not. There is no
>>> point in rejecting those translations just because people didn't want to
>>> join the team fully. (Of course, they should fix their stuff when it
>>> gets reviewed).
>>
>> That's true.
>> Without joining the team the review would be really hard.
>>
>>>
>>> Also you didn't answer my inital question if you could drop the formal
>>> introduction mail.
>>
>> Sure. I can. But let me elaborate a bit:
>>
>> In February 2010 few members of our team created a page where they
>> summarized several things where the team organization should improve
>> (acocrding their opinion). The page is here:
>>
>> http://live.gnome.org/SlovakTranslation/Others/N%C3%A1vrhy%20na%20zlep%C5%A1enie%20fungovania%20t%C3%ADmu
>>
>> Entry #1 is about joining the team. Rough (shortened) translation follows:
>>
>> Simplification of team joining
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Supported by: Peter, Roman, Laco, Ivan.
>>
>> Pavol offered improvements for his web form so it can be used as needed.
>>
>>
>>
>> In April Pavol finished his work on the web form and I stated that on
>> the page (rough translation):
>>
>> Status as of 2010-04-20: The web form works as expected. I consider this
>> issue resolved.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nobody complained. It looked that we solved the issue with the
>> registration email.
>>
>>
>> About a month after that Peter picked up this as a reason for the
>> coordinator change.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> > Unfortunatelly, this is not true. Sometimes the workflow knowledge of
>>> > new members is poor.
>>>
>>> They managed to translate and upload the file? What else do they need to
>>> know about the workflow as long as they aren't reviewers/committers?
>>
>> At least two things:
>> 1. To use proper action for upload (if not the translation might be
>> overlooked by rest of the team).
>> 2. To reserve/upload again once the translation is returned back by a
>> reviewer.
>>
>>> Please note that translating the file means that you already had to
>>> setup lots of things.
>>
>> Yes. You need to download a file, start a random text editor, edit the
>> file, and finally upload it.
>>
>>> > I agree. Now, we are in process to have such rules set up.
>>>
>>> I really wonder that you don't already have translation rules? How did
>>> you manage to do things in the past? I think every half-way solid
>>> GTP-Team has at least some list of most-used terms.
>>
>> We are going to be a half-way solid GTP-Team hopefuly soon.
>>
>>> > > Reviewers will notice when there is an inconsistency within the
>>> strings
>>> > > and are able to point that out. I think most teams have no problem
>>> in
>>> > > sharing modules between different translators.
>>> >
>>> > True. This is why I am doing now final review for all modules. I hope
>>> > this will change soon.
>>>
>>> The reviewers != you - trust in them, they know the language!
>>
>> This is dangerous definition ("they know the language"). With some
>> generalization you said that everybody knows his language in a way
>> you'll trust them regararding the language matter. That is simply not
>> true.
>>
>>>
>>> > I disagree. It depends. Other translators can select other modules, so
>>> > the rules are same for everybody.
>>> >
>>> > Some people does like to feel that this module is their work and they
>>> > are responsible and proud for them.
>>>
>>> That's ok, but they should then be able to provide a 100% translation by
>>> release date and if they cannot do that they will have to give up the
>>> module or at least open it for others.
>>
>> This would be true is everything else is at (or near) 100 %, but not
>> true if you are in the middle and there are plenty of untranslated (and
>> free) modules.
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> --
>> +-------------------------------------------+
>> | Marcel Telka   e-mail:   marcel telka sk  |
>> |                homepage: http://telka.sk/ |
>> |                jabber:   marcel jabber sk |
>> +-------------------------------------------+
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-i18n mailing list
> gnome-i18n gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
>