What happens to translations when upstream is brought in

Krzysztof Lichota krzysiek at lichota.net
Thu Aug 17 10:00:40 BST 2006

Matthew East napisał(a):
> * Krzysztof Lichota:
>>> Christian Robottom Reis napisa?(a):
>>>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 06:28:20PM +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
>>>>>> Well, you made your point very clear, and believe me when I say that I
>>>>>> share it as well.  However, you have to give us, Rosetta translator
>>>>>> and teams a bit more of credit, for we too take a lot of pride in what
>>>>>> we do, and I for one thing don't consider the many hours I spend
>>>>>> translating as "mocking around".  Once again, I strongly believe that
>>>>>> we should all get together and piece together a plan for incorporating
>>>>>> more disciplined and well-tested procedures and protocols from now on.
>>>>> Well, from my experience (in Polish translations) the results are not
>>>>> very good.
>>>> Thanks for the comment. Can you give me a better rationale as to why you
>>>> found the results not to be good? I'd like to hear about your top 3
>>>> issues so we can actually go ahead and address them.
>>> I meant that translations were not very good. Mainly because translators
>>> in Rosetta are not aware that we have our vocabulary, style guides, etc.
>>> So they start translating ad hoc.
>>> There is also no way to control who translates what in Rosetta, so
>>> everyone can translate everything (if this person is a member of
>>> translation team). This is straight way to disaster as there is no
>>> quality control.
> You are missing the point, and saying it at the same time.
> The way to control who translates what in Rosetta is to control
> membership of the translation team. This is what is done in every single
> project where quality control is important - development, upstream
> translation, documentation. The way to fix this situation is to make
> sure that the translation teams are aware of the styleguides *before*
> they are given the right to commit directly to the Ubuntu distribution.
> It's similar to giving translators the right to commit directly to Gnome
> CVS, or elsewhere - there is nothing in the design of Rosetta that
> prevents teams from doing proper quality control.

No, you are missing the point. Ubuntu translators team has no connection
to KDE translation team. The person approving members of translation
team does not have to even use KDE, not to mention to know style guide
of KDE team. And there is no way to limit which translation can be done
by whom, so person who is great translator of, lets say, XFCE tools
might go and screw up KDE translation by using wrong vocabulary,
incorrect plural forms, etc.
The rule "everyone can translate anything" is wrong.
Inside KDE translation team not everyone has right to commit
translations to repository, exactly because not everyone is trusted to
create correct (and good) translation. Control is necessary to provide

I am getting tired of repeating the same arguments over and over.
Please read
http://wiki.kde.org/tiki-index.php?page=KDERosettaCollaboration, it has
been provided exactly for the purpose of explaining our arguments. It
also has proposal of solutions.

	Krzysztof Lichota

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-translators/attachments/20060817/31d499fa/attachment.pgp 

More information about the ubuntu-translators mailing list