Re: [Tails-l10n] Choosing between Git and Transifex per-lang…

Delete this message

Reply to this message
Author: Runa A. Sandvik
Date:  
To: sajolida
CC: Tails localization discussion
Subject: Re: [Tails-l10n] Choosing between Git and Transifex per-language?
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 8:11 PM, <sajolida@???> wrote:
> On 13/05/13 09:06, Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
>> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 5:05 PM, <sajolida@???> wrote:
>>> Hi Runa,
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> As you might already know, we're facing an issue within Tails while
>>> mixing both Transifex and Git workflows to manage our translations [1].
>>> We tried to ask a question about that on their support page but we
>>> didn't get an answer:
>>>
>>> http://support.transifex.com/customer/portal/questions/932760-how-to-work-in-paralel-with-transifex-and-git
>>
>> I believe you have three options:
>>
>> 1. Use either Git or Transifex: this is probably the easiest solution.
>> The solutions I mention below will work, but will require some manual
>> work every now and then; talking to translators, merging translations,
>> and so on.
>
> That's what we want to do on a per language basis. For example, have
> French done in Git, and Swedish done in Transifex. We are looking for a
> way to prevent people translating into French in Transifex since their
> work will be rewritten by the work people do in Git. We don't want to
> merge by hand.
>
> We thought there might be a way of displaying a message to translators
> before they work, telling them to read our translation guidelines and
> see whether the work is done in Git or Transifex. But we didn't find how
> to do that through what we can see from the Transifex interface.


I don't think there is a way to do that at the moment. You could file
a request with the developers, but it will probably take a while
before anything is designed/tested/implemented.

> So for the moment our plan is simply to contact people doing work on
> Transifex which is not merged in Git and warn them that their work in
> overwritten.
>
>> 2. Require translation teams on Transifex: users will have to request
>> teams for the languages they wish to translate in. For example: Bob
>> requests the creation of a Spanish team. You reject the request
>> because Spanish translations should be done using Git. Bob cannot
>> translate on Transifex, but does not know that you want him to use
>> Git. You will then have to find some way to tell Bob this (possibly by
>> sending a message on Transifex), which will include work on your end
>> and potentially frustrated translators.
>
> That sounds like a good solution too. Could you tell us more about that
> feature? For example:
>
> - Is it possible to require teams on a per ressource basis? If we
> require a team for French on "Tails - tails-greeter.pot" does that mean
> that a team will also be required for French on "TorCheck -
> TorCheck.pot" because that won't be practical since we are sharing
> resources between Tor and Tails inside a same project.
>
> - Is it possible to require teams on a per language basis? If we require
> a team for French does that mean that a team will also be required for
> Swedish?


It is per language; if someone requests a team for French and Swedish,
then you can choose to approve just the French team. I don't think it
is possible to require teams on a per-resource basis.

> I'm also wondering how practical all this will be because you are
> managing resources for us. So if we require teams in some cases, you
> will be the one to manage the requests... unless you see another way of
> doing so...


You will have to create your own account, set up a Tails page on
Transifex, and manage your own resources.

>> 3. Use both Git and Transifex: all translations done on Transifex are
>> in translations.git. It is possible to send translations to Transifex
>> from a Git repository using the Transifex command line client, but you
>> will overwrite whatever you have on Transifex already. While it is
>> technically possible to use both solutions, it will likely cause
>> conflicts, translations will be lost, you will have more manual work
>> to do, etc.
>
> That's what we want to avoid.
>
>>> If I understand correctly, Tor is a paying custom, and as a consequence,
>>> should be able to get a better and more direct support. Could you try to
>>> relay our question to them?
>>
>> This is not correct.
>
> Oops... Do you mean Tor is not a paying customer or that you don't get
> support with the plan that you are paying for?


We are not paying Transifex.

--
Runa A. Sandvik