Hi! What is better to be translated?

David Planella david.planella at ubuntu.com
Mon Aug 9 11:37:35 BST 2010


El ds 07 de 08 de 2010 a les 10:47 +0200, en/na Hannie va escriure:
> Op 06-08-10 16:39, Miro Hadzhiev schreef: 
> > On 06/08/10 17:34, David Planella wrote: 
> > > Hi Miro,
> > > 
> > > 2010/8/6 Miro Hadzhiev <extigyro at gmail.com>:
> > >   
> > > > What is better to be translated, the package (the trunk package in
> > > > Launchpad) or the same package in Ubuntu Lucid, Maverick and so on (that is
> > > > to say the specific package which is going to be shipped in the next Ubuntu
> > > > version/spin)?
> > > > 
> > > >     
> > > As you have well noticed, for those projects hosted as upstream in
> > > Launchpad and also shipped in Ubuntu, there are two translation
> > > locations:
> > > 
> > > * The upstream project
> > > * The Ubuntu source packages (one for each release)
> > > 
> > > Right now, I'd recommend translating the Ubuntu source package from
> > > the development version, that is, for Maverick. Once you've done that,
> > > you can also go to the upstream project and translate it. Since you
> > > will already have done the job for Ubuntu, those translations will
> > > appear as suggestions and you will only need to point and click to
> > > accept them. So, while not optimal, it is really easy to keep the
> > > projects in sync like this.
> > > 
> > > In the near future, Launchpad will do this for you and there will be
> > > message sharing between Launchpad upstream projects and the Ubuntu
> > > source packages (this is something the developers are actively working
> > > on right now)
> > > 
> > > For those who are not aware: message sharing is a really cool feature
> > > through which translated messages are shared across series. That is,
> > > if you translate a message in Lucid, that same message will be
> > > instantly translated in Maverick and even previous releases.
> > > 
> > > As an example of such a project hosted in Launchpad, here's simple scan:
> > > 
> > > Upstream project:
> > > https://translations.launchpad.net/simple-scan
> > > 
> > > Ubuntu source packages:
> > > https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+sources/simple-scan/+translations
> > > https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+sources/simple-scan/+translations
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > David.
> > >   
> > A very quick and really useful answer. Thanks, David!
> > 
> > 
> > Miro H.
> Hello David,
> The example you give here (simple-scan) is quite clear. 
> Am I right in concluding that, in the case of Aptitude, I am to
> translate this first:
> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/maverick/+source/aptitude/+pots/aptitude/nl/, and that I have to send the downloaded po-file (from LP) to Debian-nl?
> 

It's up to the workflow of your team. If you prefer using the online
translation, global suggestions, etc. features in Launchpad, so that you
translate there first and then send the translation upstream, that's
absolutely fine.

Some teams translate upstream first and wait for the translation to make
its way into Launchpad, which is another typical workflow.

In short, your suggested approach is good, and you should use whatever
works best for you and your team. 

> You may have followed the discussion about something similar in the
> thread 'Is Aptitude upstream?
> Quote==========
> On https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/maverick/+lang/nl/ I find
> many templates that should not be translated by us, Ubuntu Dutch
> Translation Team. With Gnome and KDE it is not so difficult, because
> it is usually in the name. But with others I am not sure if we should
> translate them or not. One of them is Aptitude. Is this upstream
> (Debian), or not?
> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/maverick/+source/aptitude/+pots/aptitude/nl/+translate?field.alternative_language-empty-marker=1
> In fact, only few of the 1340 templates are NOT upstream (e.g.
> (K)Ubuntu-docs, software-center, app-install-data).
> Would it not be a good idea to mention in the list of templates
> whether it is upstream or Ubuntu?
> Hannie Dumoleyn
> In general, you should translate any template where translations are
> still missing, no matter if they come from upstream or they are native
> to Ubuntu. (Part of the answer by Arne Goetje)
> Unquote============
> 
> I have another question about this: I checked a few KDE templates (I
> am also a member of the kde-nl translation team). Example: Koffice.
> This has been fully translated at KDE, but not in Launchpad. Will the
> fully translated KDE-version be imported into LP eventually? And if
> so, then why should I finish the unfinished version on LP?
> 

If you are both part of the Ubuntu and upstream teams, that works best,
as you've got knowledge of both systems and know which translations to
do where. If you have translated something upstream, there is no need to
translate it again in Launchpad.

As per the particular case of koffice, I've just talked to the Kubuntu
guys and it seems that koffice-l10n, the package where koffice
translations live upstream, was in the universe repository, which
stopped them from being imported into Launchpad. This will be fixed, and
very soon you'll see your upstream translations in Launchpad for
Maverick.

> I am really at a loss here, because I do not know what to translate
> from the list on 
> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/maverick/+lang/nl/
> Regards,
> Hannie
> 
> 

Regards,
David.

-- 
David Planella
Ubuntu Translations Coordinator
www.ubuntu.com / www.davidplanella.wordpress.com
www.identi.ca/dplanella / www.twitter.com/dplanella
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-translators/attachments/20100809/9bc2786e/attachment.pgp 


More information about the ubuntu-translators mailing list