Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 19:39:23 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Federico Caminiti <demian.fc@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-translators@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFT: PO/Gettext Translation System for FreeBSD DocBook Documents Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1509071743040.13035@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGVyxZHRjTNqvhe1Uk7TvgY-%2BQcNspApTzxetLGVR9n8E1Svsw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAGVyxZE8uV9yaFPVAqX5pcR9oTA1QUq7D1iqDDRgs8yWFL20tA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1509022158460.54413@wonkity.com> <CAGVyxZHRjTNqvhe1Uk7TvgY-%2BQcNspApTzxetLGVR9n8E1Svsw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 7 Sep 2015, Federico Caminiti wrote: > > Right, the new chapter does not say what to do, because we needed feedback on how translators would like to do it. > > Benedict Reuschling of the German translation team translated the leap seconds article and committed the article itself. > > I think we could have translators commit the PO files. The build system would generate the XML books and articles as needed. > > If people are able to share the PO files, it increases the translation memory and makes translating other documents easier. New translators can build on the work of > previous ones. > > Taking it farther, there is Pootle, where most of the process happens online. PC-BSD is using it. > > > I've used it briefly a while ago (I helped translate a few things for PC-BSD a while ago) . Having used Poedit, it seems easier to use for me, at least the UI feels better than Pootle's > Web UI. The upside is that it doen't require the user to run FreeBSD whenever he/she wants to translate articles (you could translate articles from your phone or from a Windows > computer). I'd still rather use Poedit, though. Sure. Of course, once the PO file has been created or updated with 'make po', it can be copied to another system for editing, then copied back afterward to use 'make tran'. > Which way to go probably depends on how many people are translating into a particular language. The way it is set up right now has the bare minimum of overhead and allows > translators to choose their own PO editor. > > What do you think? > > > I don't mind sending XML diffs, since the process has mostly been automatized now and I don't have to think too much about it. Nevertheless, being able to commit .po files directly > would definitely make things easier, at least for me. For now, both the PO file and the generated XML article or book can be committed. That way the PO file can be shared and updated by multiple people. > On an unrelated subject I'd like to know if the situation on > translations has improved since the last time. By that I mean that if > there is any hope to get any spanish translations commited (maybe > someone with commit privileges has emerged and is willing to review > them, or maybe with the new system, reviewing spanish translations > will become easier). Let's start by submitting bug reports with the new translations. We can work to find committers for them. The PO software makes for less to review, since we do not have to worry about the DocBook source, just the content. > I know this is probably a subject for a different topic, but while > testing the translation system I've translated the leap-seconds > article and I'd love to see it commited some day :) . Chris Petrik also did a Spanish translation of the leap seconds article during testing. It had not occurred to me to commit it. The reason that article is shown as a test is that it is the shortest and most recent general article we have. Either way, the work is not wasted, because it increased the local translation memory.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1509071743040.13035>