[DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

["Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>]

I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new 
thread.

For reference here is the old policy:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements

My new suggestion:

1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.

2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.

3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. 
This should be translated much better than 90%.

Why?

1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do 
average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I 
don't think so.

2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or 
better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.

3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. 
should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. 
They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not 
translated parts.

And now, add your points.

Marcus



Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>
>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the
>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>> mailing
>>>>> list...").
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we
>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is
>>>>> incomplete
>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>> The
>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>> 4.0.0
>>>>> RC.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>
>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>> released.
>>>>
>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not
>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>
>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>
>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we
>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support
>> local communities.
>>>
>>
>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>
>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>
>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>> to "miss the train".
>>
>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>> we released.
>>
>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>> next train.
>>
>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>> Is that enough time?
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the 4.0
> release.
>
> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>
> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>
> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we absolutely
> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>
> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy on
> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>
> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>
>
>
>>
>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German
>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete.
>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate
>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>
>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that
>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>
>>> Juergen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

["Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>]

Am 07/14/2013 07:12 PM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt:
> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 18:37 schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>> thread.
>>
>> For reference here is the old policy:
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>
>> My new suggestion:
>>
>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>
>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>
>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar.
>> This should be translated much better than 90%.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>> don't think so.
>>
>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>> better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>
>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>> They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not
>> translated parts.
>>
>> And now, add your points.
> first of all I would like to bring the release out and then we can discuss the process for the future.
>
> For now we have defined to use 100% UI and as much as possible for Help.
>
> And I personally don't like to move back to UI less than 100%. And I see of course a big difference between UI and help. But it is not easy because useful short help is part of the Help and will be shown in the UI directly ... Long term goal should be 100% for everything and I believe it is doable with active communities. Once you have reached 100% the maintenance will be less effort. Only new features or minor rework have to be done hopefully.

Sorry if you have understood to apply the new policy for AOO 4.0. Of 
course this should not be the case.

Marcus



>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the
>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mailing
>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we
>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is
>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The
>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> released.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not
>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we
>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support
>>>> local communities.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>
>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>
>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>
>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon. Maybe
>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations). Hopefully we all remember
>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>> we released.
>>>>
>>>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>> translating AOO to other languages. There will always be another
>>>> language that is "almost ready". That is what success looks like. We
>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready. We can't hold up
>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>> next train.
>>>>
>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the 4.0
>>> release.
>>>
>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>
>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>
>>> But...I think we should first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we absolutely
>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>
>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy on
>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>
>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German
>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete.
>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate
>>>>
>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that
>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Juergen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>]

Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 18:37 schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new 
> thread.
> 
> For reference here is the old policy:
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
> 
> My new suggestion:
> 
> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
> 
> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
> 
> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. 
> This should be translated much better than 90%.
> 
> Why?
> 
> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do 
> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I 
> don't think so.
> 
> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or 
> better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
> 
> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. 
> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. 
> They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not 
> translated parts.
> 
> And now, add your points.
first of all I would like to bring the release out and then we can discuss the process for the future.

For now we have defined to use 100% UI and as much as possible for Help.

And I personally don't like to move back to UI less than 100%. And I see of course a big difference between UI and help. But it is not easy because useful short help is part of the Help and will be shown in the UI directly ... Long term goal should be 100% for everything and I believe it is doable with active communities. Once you have reached 100% the maintenance will be less effort. Only new features or minor rework have to be done hopefully.

Juergen
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
> > > > > On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
> > > > > > On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> > > > > > > Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
> > > > > > > > > something on the Traditional Chinese version?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > UI translation is not complete:
> > > https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
> > > > > > > agreement that we need 100% for a release?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the
> > > > > > mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > mailing
> > > > > > list...").
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we
> > > > > > > have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
> > > > > > > [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is
> > > > > > incomplete
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
> > > > > > How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > The
> > > > > > same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 4.0.0
> > > > > > RC.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
> > > > > sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
> > > > > discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
> > > > > conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
> > > > > announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
> > > > > would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > released.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
> > > > > (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
> > > > > our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
> > > > > governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not
> > > > > available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
> > > > > development could not be based on.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
> > > > > If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
> > > > > certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we
> > > can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support
> > > local communities.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
> > > 
> > > 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
> > > can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
> > > 
> > > 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
> > > to "miss the train".
> > > 
> > > IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
> > > leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon. Maybe
> > > we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
> > > making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
> > > 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations). Hopefully we all remember
> > > that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
> > > we released.
> > > 
> > > From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
> > > translating AOO to other languages. There will always be another
> > > language that is "almost ready". That is what success looks like. We
> > > need to handle new translations when they are ready. We can't hold up
> > > the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
> > > next train.
> > > 
> > > So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
> > > Is that enough time?
> > > 
> > > -Rob
> > 
> > This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
> > and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the 4.0
> > release.
> > 
> > Re the old stated "policy" on :
> > 
> > http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
> > 
> > If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
> > 
> > But...I think we should first discuss the policy. What levels of
> > translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we absolutely
> > require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
> > 
> > Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy on
> > the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
> > 
> > http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German
> > > (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete.
> > > > Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate
> > > 
> > > in the project or at least in the translation part.
> > > > 
> > > > It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that
> > > is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
> > > > 
> > > > Juergen
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>]

On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>>> thread.
>>> 
>>> For reference here is the old policy:
>>> 
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>> 
>>> My new suggestion:
>>> 
>>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>> 
>>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>> 
>>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>>> should be translated much better than 90%.
>>> 
>>> Why?
>>> 
>>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>>> don't think so.
>>> 
>>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>> better
>>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>> 
>>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>> They
>>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>>> parts.
>>> 
>>> And now, add your points.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
>> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
>> the bar, not lowering it.
>> 
>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>> 
> 
> In many cases, it is probably a "time" factor rather than an interest
> factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication
> between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to
> release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement.
> 
> 
> 
>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
>> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
>> then release it.
>> 
>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
>> release.
>> 
> 
> yes, I agree.
> 
> 
>> 
>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
>> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>> 
>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>> 
> 
> again, agreement
> 
> 
>> 
>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
>> state and help translate.
>> 
> 
> hmmmm...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy.
> 
> I  guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development
> snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate
> this.

We need to VOTE to release whether or not it is an official source release or any type of binary convenience release. For the PMC vote on a language pack the bar to +1 won't be as high because the IP concerns differ.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> Marcus
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jogischmidt@gmail.com
>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>> 
>>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
>> the
>>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>> 
>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
>> we
>>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
>> is
>>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>> 
>>>>> The
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>> 
>>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>> 
>>>>> released.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
>> not
>>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>>>> we
>>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>>>> support
>>>>> local communities.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>> 
>>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>>> we released.
>>>>> 
>>>>> From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>>> next train.
>>>>> 
>>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
>> 4.0
>>>> release.
>>>> 
>>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>> 
>>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>> 
>>>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>>>> absolutely
>>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>> 
>>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
>> on
>>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>> 
>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
>> German
>>>>> 
>>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
>> complete.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
>> participate
>>>>> 
>>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
>> that
>>>>> 
>>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Juergen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
> 
> Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
>                             -- Jon Bon Jovi


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>]

On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>>>> thread.
>>>> 
>>>> For reference here is the old policy:
>>>> 
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>> 
>>>> My new suggestion:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>>> 
>>>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>>> 
>>>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>>>> should be translated much better than 90%.
>>>> 
>>>> Why?
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>>>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>>>> don't think so.
>>>> 
>>>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>>> better
>>>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>>> 
>>>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>>>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>>> They
>>>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>>>> parts.
>>>> 
>>>> And now, add your points.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
>>> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
>>> the bar, not lowering it.
>>> 
>>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
>>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>>> 
>> 
>> In many cases, it is probably a "time" factor rather than an interest
>> factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication
>> between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to
>> release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
>>> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
>>> then release it.
>>> 
>>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
>>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
>>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
>>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
>>> release.
>>> 
>> 
>> yes, I agree.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
>>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
>>> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>>> 
>>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
>>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>>> 
>> 
>> again, agreement
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
>>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
>>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
>>> state and help translate.
>>> 
>> 
>> hmmmm...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy.
>> 
>> I  guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development
>> snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate
>> this.
>> 
> 
> I mean treat it *exactly* like we do a dev snapshot.  It is not
> advertised outside of the project.   The only difference is it would
> be built with the AOO 4.0 release code revision.  Or think of itas
> being an early build of the re-release of AOO 4.0 with additional
> languages.   Eventually, if/when the translation is completed, we have
> a RC at that time, and a vote and then they are released.

So a policy could be that we will build Dev Snapshots of Language Packs if the translation is over N%?

Where N could be 80 or 75%?

I think that this would encourage language communities to make the effort.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> -Rob
>>> 
>>>> Marcus
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jogischmidt@gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
>>> the
>>>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
>>> is
>>>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> released.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
>>> not
>>>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>>>>> support
>>>>>> local communities.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>>>> we released.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>>>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>>>> next train.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
>>> 4.0
>>>>> release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>>> 
>>>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>>>>> absolutely
>>>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
>>> on
>>>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
>>> German
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
>>> complete.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
>>> participate
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
>>> that
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Juergen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> MzK
>> 
>> Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
>>                             -- Jon Bon Jovi
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>> > I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>> > thread.
>> >
>> > For reference here is the old policy:
>> >
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>> >
>> > My new suggestion:
>> >
>> > 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>> >
>> > 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>> >
>> > 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>> > should be translated much better than 90%.
>> >
>> > Why?
>> >
>> > 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>> > average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>> > don't think so.
>> >
>> > 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>> better
>> > for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>> >
>> > 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>> > should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>> They
>> > want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>> > parts.
>> >
>> > And now, add your points.
>> >
>>
>>
>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
>> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
>> the bar, not lowering it.
>>
>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>>
>
> In many cases, it is probably a "time" factor rather than an interest
> factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication
> between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to
> release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement.
>
>
>
>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
>> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
>> then release it.
>>
>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
>> release.
>>
>
> yes, I agree.
>
>
>>
>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
>> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>>
>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>>
>
> again, agreement
>
>
>>
>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
>> state and help translate.
>>
>
> hmmmm...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy.
>
> I  guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development
> snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate
> this.
>

I mean treat it *exactly* like we do a dev snapshot.  It is not
advertised outside of the project.   The only difference is it would
be built with the AOO 4.0 release code revision.  Or think of itas
being an early build of the re-release of AOO 4.0 with additional
languages.   Eventually, if/when the translation is completed, we have
a RC at that time, and a vote and then they are released.

-Rob


>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > Marcus
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jogischmidt@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>> >>>
>> >>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>> >>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>> >>>
>> >>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>> >>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
>> the
>> >>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>> >>>
>> >>> mailing
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> list...").
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
>> we
>> >>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>> >>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
>> is
>> >>>>>> incomplete
>> >>>
>> >>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>> >>>
>> >>> The
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>> >>>
>> >>> 4.0.0
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> RC.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>> >>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>> >>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>> >>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>> >>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>> >>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>> >>>
>> >>> released.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>> >>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>> >>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>> >>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
>> not
>> >>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>> >>>>> development could not be based on.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>> >>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>> >>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>> >>> we
>> >>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>> >>> support
>> >>> local communities.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>> >>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>> >>> to "miss the train".
>> >>>
>> >>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>> >>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>> >>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>> >>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>> >>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>> >>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>> >>> we released.
>> >>>
>> >>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>> >>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>> >>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>> >>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>> >>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>> >>> next train.
>> >>>
>> >>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>> >>> Is that enough time?
>> >>>
>> >>> -Rob
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>> >> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
>> 4.0
>> >> release.
>> >>
>> >> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>> >>
>> >> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>> >>
>> >> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>> >> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>> >> absolutely
>> >> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>> >>
>> >> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
>> on
>> >> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>> >>
>> >> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
>> German
>> >>>
>> >>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
>> complete.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
>> participate
>> >>>
>> >>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
>> that
>> >>>
>> >>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Juergen
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
>                              -- Jon Bon Jovi

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
> wrote:
> > I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
> > thread.
> >
> > For reference here is the old policy:
> >
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
> >
> > My new suggestion:
> >
> > 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
> >
> > 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
> >
> > 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
> > should be translated much better than 90%.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
> > average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
> > don't think so.
> >
> > 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
> better
> > for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
> >
> > 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
> > should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
> They
> > want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
> > parts.
> >
> > And now, add your points.
> >
>
>
> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
> the bar, not lowering it.
>
> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>

In many cases, it is probably a "time" factor rather than an interest
factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication
between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to
release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement.



> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
> then release it.
>
> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
> release.
>

yes, I agree.


>
> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>
> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>

again, agreement


>
> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
> state and help translate.
>

hmmmm...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy.

I  guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development
snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate
this.



>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> > Marcus
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jogischmidt@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
> >>>
> >>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
> >>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
> >>>
> >>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
> >>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
> the
> >>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
> >>>
> >>> mailing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> list...").
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
> we
> >>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
> >>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
> is
> >>>>>> incomplete
> >>>
> >>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
> >>>
> >>> The
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
> >>>
> >>> 4.0.0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> RC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
> >>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
> >>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
> >>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
> >>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
> >>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
> >>>
> >>> released.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
> >>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
> >>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
> >>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
> not
> >>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
> >>>>> development could not be based on.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
> >>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
> >>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
> >>>>>
> >>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
> >>>
> >>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
> >>> we
> >>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
> >>> support
> >>> local communities.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
> >>>
> >>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
> >>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
> >>>
> >>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
> >>> to "miss the train".
> >>>
> >>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
> >>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
> >>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
> >>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
> >>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
> >>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
> >>> we released.
> >>>
> >>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
> >>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
> >>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
> >>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
> >>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
> >>> next train.
> >>>
> >>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
> >>> Is that enough time?
> >>>
> >>> -Rob
> >>>
> >>
> >> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
> >> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
> 4.0
> >> release.
> >>
> >> Re the old stated "policy" on :
> >>
> >>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
> >>
> >> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
> >>
> >> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
> >> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
> >> absolutely
> >> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
> >>
> >> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
> on
> >> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
> >>
> >> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
> German
> >>>
> >>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
> complete.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
> participate
> >>>
> >>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
> that
> >>>
> >>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Juergen
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
                             -- Jon Bon Jovi

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>>> Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>>>>> thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> For reference here is the old policy:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>>>
>>>>> My new suggestion:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>>>>> should be translated much better than 90%.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>>>>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>>>>> don't think so.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>>>>> better
>>>>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>>>>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>>>>> They
>>>>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>>>>> parts.
>>>>>
>>>>> And now, add your points.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
>>>> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
>>>> the bar, not lowering it.
>>>>
>>>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
>>>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>>>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
>>>> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
>>>> then release it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick
>>> with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
>>>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
>>>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
>>>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
>>>> release.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't
>>> release it.
>>>
>>>
>>>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
>>>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
>>>> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>>>>
>>>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
>>>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>>>
>>>
>>> But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
>>>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
>>>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
>>>> state and help translate.
>>>
>>>
>>> Good point, +1.
>>>
>>> Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC where
>>> it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released?
>>>
>>
>> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
>> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
>> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
>> for AOO 4.1.
>
> I don't disagree with the policy of deadlines, but why September 16th? If some languages are ready sooner (like Traditional Chinese) it ought to be possible to have an earlier set. Perhaps we make it once a month?
>

My impression was that several key people are planning on taking
vacation after AOO 4.0 is released.   Nothing magic about the Sept
16th date.  But there is something magic about August ;-)

> We also need to understand that there will be a certain length of time from a deadline to a language pack release. Is it one week?
>

Right.  I was suggesting that date as a release date.   We'd need to
work backwards to set translation deadlines, etc.


>> You ask about an RC where it is not clear whether it will be released?
>>  We may run into that issue if we have a beta for AOO 4.1.  I don't
>> think all translations are complete for a beta.  (Or are they?)  If so
>> it is possible for a beta to include a language that never is included
>> in the final release. This would occur if the translators do not
>> finish the translation.   This may sound cruel, but we can use this
>> for recruitment.  When we publish the beta we can note that the
>> translation is not finished and that volunteers are welcome.
>
> I think that we should be careful to have a UI and Help freeze in advance of releases in order to give plenty of time for language teams to assure that they can meet our high standard of 100%.
>
> If we are going to co-ordinate many small teams then we need to establish schedules and try to commit to them. (As Jürgen has done for this RC.)
>

Exactly.

-Rob

> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>   wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>   wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> released.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>> local communities.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>>>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>>>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>>>>> we released.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>>>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>>>>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>>>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>>>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>>>>> next train.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>>>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
>>>>>> 4.0
>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>>>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>>>>>> absolutely
>>>>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
>>>>>>>> German
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
>>>>>>> complete.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
>>>>>>>> participate
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Juergen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ciao
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>]

On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>>>> thread.
>>>> 
>>>> For reference here is the old policy:
>>>> 
>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>> 
>>>> My new suggestion:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>>> 
>>>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>>> 
>>>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>>>> should be translated much better than 90%.
>>>> 
>>>> Why?
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>>>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>>>> don't think so.
>>>> 
>>>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>>>> better
>>>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>>> 
>>>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>>>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>>>> They
>>>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>>>> parts.
>>>> 
>>>> And now, add your points.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
>>> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
>>> the bar, not lowering it.
>>> 
>>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
>>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
>>> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
>>> then release it.
>> 
>> 
>> Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick
>> with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing.
>> 
>> 
>>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
>>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
>>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
>>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
>>> release.
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't
>> release it.
>> 
>> 
>>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
>>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
>>> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>>> 
>>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
>>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>> 
>> 
>> But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-)
>> 
>> 
>>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
>>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
>>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
>>> state and help translate.
>> 
>> 
>> Good point, +1.
>> 
>> Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC where
>> it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released?
>> 
> 
> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
> for AOO 4.1.

I don't disagree with the policy of deadlines, but why September 16th? If some languages are ready sooner (like Traditional Chinese) it ought to be possible to have an earlier set. Perhaps we make it once a month?

We also need to understand that there will be a certain length of time from a deadline to a language pack release. Is it one week?

> You ask about an RC where it is not clear whether it will be released?
>  We may run into that issue if we have a beta for AOO 4.1.  I don't
> think all translations are complete for a beta.  (Or are they?)  If so
> it is possible for a beta to include a language that never is included
> in the final release. This would occur if the translators do not
> finish the translation.   This may sound cruel, but we can use this
> for recruitment.  When we publish the beta we can note that the
> translation is not finished and that volunteers are welcome.

I think that we should be careful to have a UI and Help freeze in advance of releases in order to give plenty of time for language teams to assure that they can meet our high standard of 100%.

If we are going to co-ordinate many small teams then we need to establish schedules and try to commit to them. (As Jürgen has done for this RC.)

Regards,
Dave


> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>   wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>   wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> released.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>>>>> support
>>>>>> local communities.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>>>> we released.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>>>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>>>> next train.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
>>>>> 4.0
>>>>> release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>>> 
>>>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>>>>> absolutely
>>>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
>>>>> on
>>>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
>>>>>>> German
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
>>>>>> complete.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
>>>>>>> participate
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Juergen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Ciao
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>]

On 8/2/13 2:04 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> -1 from my side, too much work for me with the current setup
>> As long as we can't use builds from build bots for the release I won't
>> have time to do a monthly lang update.
> 
> Andrew reconfigured the Windows buildbots in this direction, but the
> weekly Windows snapshot build after the update was not successful:
> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
> 
> Still, the concept of "releasing language updates from the builbots"
> would need some discussion, for example integrating the new SDF files in
> the old release branch and switching the buildbots to that branch before
> release.
> 
> If I recall correctly, we had two additional languages already ready (UI
> 100%) on release day: traditional Chinese and Khmer. I expect that more
> reach 100% in the next couple of weeks, so we will then have to start
> planning either a language update or a 4.0.1 if we identify bugs that
> deserve early fixes.

sure and I expect a combined lang + bugfix release 4.0.1

Juergen

> 
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>]

Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> -1 from my side, too much work for me with the current setup
> As long as we can't use builds from build bots for the release I won't
> have time to do a monthly lang update.

Andrew reconfigured the Windows buildbots in this direction, but the 
weekly Windows snapshot build after the update was not successful:
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap

Still, the concept of "releasing language updates from the builbots" 
would need some discussion, for example integrating the new SDF files in 
the old release branch and switching the buildbots to that branch before 
release.

If I recall correctly, we had two additional languages already ready (UI 
100%) on release day: traditional Chinese and Khmer. I expect that more 
reach 100% in the next couple of weeks, so we will then have to start 
planning either a language update or a 4.0.1 if we identify bugs that 
deserve early fixes.

Regards,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>]

On 8/1/13 11:56 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 07/15/2013 09:04 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>>> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0, I'm suggesting we release any
>>> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th. This is similar
>>> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1. After that date I think we then wait
>>> for AOO 4.1.
>>
>> Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is
>> something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August
>> may be problematic due to holidays).
>>
>> Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:
>>
>> 1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as
>> 4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.
>>
>> 2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots
>> available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.
> 
> As I haven't seen any objections, IMHO it's safe to assume we have an
> agreement.

-1 from my side, too much work for me with the current setup

As long as we can't use builds from build bots for the release I won't
have time to do a monthly lang update.

Juergen


> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

["Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>]

Am 07/15/2013 09:04 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0, I'm suggesting we release any
>> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th. This is similar
>> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1. After that date I think we then wait
>> for AOO 4.1.
>
> Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is
> something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August
> may be problematic due to holidays).
>
> Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:
>
> 1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as
> 4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.
>
> 2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots
> available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.

As I haven't seen any objections, IMHO it's safe to assume we have an 
agreement.

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>]

On 7/15/2013 12:19 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 7/15/13 9:04 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>>> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
>>> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
>>> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
>>> for AOO 4.1.
>> Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is
>> something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August
>> may be problematic due to holidays).
>>
>> Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:
>>
>> 1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as
>> 4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.
>>
>> 2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots
>> available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.
> People should work on a reliable build bot infra structure that can
> provide builds for all major platforms (Linux, Windows, MacOS). And then
> we can configure more languages on demand.
While there are periodic complaints about the build bots (e.g.  when 
there are breaking changes made to the source tree), the main bots are 
pretty stable.  They mainly break when broken.  If you look at Windows 
Snapshot build <http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7snap/> , the Windows 
nightly build <http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-win7/> , and the Linux 
64bit build <http://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-nightly/> 
, you will notice that they are quite stable (esp. with the fix to the 
hanging process issue)

We can ask again at infra for our CentOS linux 32 bot and Mac hardware, 
and we have waited long enough on that front.  But, are there any issues 
we can identify with the current Windows snapshot build that make it 
unusable?
We can configure more languages on these bots on demand right now. Is 
there a technical reason you don't like them?

A.


>
> I will be not the manual build bot ;-)
>
> Proposing is fine but please think also about the realization.
>
> Juergen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>]

On 22/07/2013 Andrew Rist wrote:
> On 7/20/2013 1:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 15/07/2013 Herbert Duerr wrote:
>>> Currently the Windows buildbot of the SNAPSHOT tag does a weekly full
>>> build of all languages:
>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
>>> Is any fully translated language missing from that list?
>> Yes, ast.
>>> Should semi-translated languages be built too?
>> The following have less than 20.000 words left (means, 75%+ done, more
>> or less) and should ideally be built too:
>> ca eu he hi id lt pl sv th tr
> ok - I committed this change.

I only see ast there, but likely the weekly build hasn't run yet. Would 
it be possible to add "kid" too? It's a special (KeyID) build useful to 
translators.

Thanks,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>]

On 7/20/2013 1:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 15/07/2013 Herbert Duerr wrote:
>> Currently the Windows buildbot of the SNAPSHOT tag does a weekly full
>> build of all languages:
>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
>> Is any fully translated language missing from that list?
>
> Yes, ast.
>
>> Should semi-translated languages be built too?
>
> The following have less than 20.000 words left (means, 75%+ done, more 
> or less) and should ideally be built too:
> ca eu he hi id lt pl sv th tr
ok - I committed this change.
>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>]

On 15/07/2013 Herbert Duerr wrote:
> Currently the Windows buildbot of the SNAPSHOT tag does a weekly full
> build of all languages:
> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
> Is any fully translated language missing from that list?

Yes, ast.

> Should semi-translated languages be built too?

The following have less than 20.000 words left (means, 75%+ done, more 
or less) and should ideally be built too:
ca eu he hi id lt pl sv th tr

Regards,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>]

On 15.07.2013 09:19, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 7/15/13 9:04 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>>> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
>>> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
>>> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
>>> for AOO 4.1.
>>
>> Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is
>> something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August
>> may be problematic due to holidays).
>>
>> Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:
>>
>> 1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as
>> 4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.
>>
>> 2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots
>> available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.
>
> People should work on a reliable build bot infra structure that can
> provide builds for all major platforms (Linux, Windows, MacOS). And then
> we can configure more languages on demand.

Currently the Windows buildbot of the SNAPSHOT tag does a weekly full 
build of all languages:
   http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
Is any fully translated language missing from that list? Should 
semi-translated languages be built too?

Yes, we should build all languages on all other platforms too. But we 
don't have a Mac buildbot yet and until the build baseline is increased 
to XCode4 that will probably have to stay so. On the Linux64 things look 
much better but disk space on that buildbot used to be a problem. The 
Linux32 buildbot needs to be set up, but from a localization perspective 
its build result it is indistinguishable from the Linux64 build.

Also FreeBSD buildbot would be possible, but AFAIK Maho is working on a 
tinderbox build there, so setting up a buildbot would probably be wasted 
work. Also getting buildbots for OS/2 or Solaris X86 or Sparc just for 
the localized snapshot builds is probably wasted work unless there is a 
number of translators that only test on these platforms.

Herbert


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>]

On 7/15/13 9:04 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
>> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
>> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
>> for AOO 4.1.
> 
> Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is
> something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August
> may be problematic due to holidays).
> 
> Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:
> 
> 1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as
> 4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.
> 
> 2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots
> available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.

People should work on a reliable build bot infra structure that can
provide builds for all major platforms (Linux, Windows, MacOS). And then
we can configure more languages on demand.

I will be not the manual build bot ;-)

Proposing is fine but please think also about the realization.

Juergen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>]

On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
> In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
> additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
> to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
> for AOO 4.1.

Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is 
something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August 
may be problematic due to holidays).

Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:

1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as 
4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.

2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots 
available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.

Regards,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>>> thread.
>>>
>>> For reference here is the old policy:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>
>>> My new suggestion:
>>>
>>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>>
>>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>>
>>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>>> should be translated much better than 90%.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>>> don't think so.
>>>
>>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
>>> better
>>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>>
>>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
>>> They
>>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>>> parts.
>>>
>>> And now, add your points.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
>> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
>> the bar, not lowering it.
>>
>> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
>> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
>> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
>> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
>> then release it.
>
>
> Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick
> with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing.
>
>
>> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
>> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
>> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
>> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
>> release.
>
>
> Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't
> release it.
>
>
>> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
>> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
>> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>>
>> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
>> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>
>
> But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-)
>
>
>> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
>> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
>> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
>> state and help translate.
>
>
> Good point, +1.
>
> Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC where
> it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released?
>

In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
for AOO 4.1.

You ask about an RC where it is not clear whether it will be released?
  We may run into that issue if we have a beta for AOO 4.1.  I don't
think all translations are complete for a beta.  (Or are they?)  If so
it is possible for a beta to include a language that never is included
in the final release. This would occur if the translators do not
finish the translation.   This may sound cruel, but we can use this
for recruitment.  When we publish the beta we can note that the
translation is not finished and that volunteers are welcome.

Regards,

-Rob

>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>   wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> released.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>>>> we
>>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>>>> support
>>>>> local communities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>>> we released.
>>>>>
>>>>>   From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>>> next train.
>>>>>
>>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
>>>> 4.0
>>>> release.
>>>>
>>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>>
>>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>>
>>>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>>>> absolutely
>>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>>
>>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
>>>> on
>>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>>
>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
>>>>>> German
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
>>>>> complete.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
>>>>>> participate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
>>>>>> that
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ciao
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

["Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>]

Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>  wrote:
>> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
>> thread.
>>
>> For reference here is the old policy:
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>
>> My new suggestion:
>>
>> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>>
>> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>>
>> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
>> should be translated much better than 90%.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
>> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
>> don't think so.
>>
>> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better
>> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>>
>> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
>> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They
>> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
>> parts.
>>
>> And now, add your points.
>>
>
>
> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
> the bar, not lowering it.
>
> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
> then release it.

Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick 
with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing.

> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
> release.

Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't 
release it.

> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>
> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.

But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-)

> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
> state and help translate.

Good point, +1.

Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC 
where it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released?

Marcus



>> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>>
>>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>   wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>>
>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the
>>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>>
>>>> mailing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we
>>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is
>>>>>>> incomplete
>>>>
>>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>>
>>>> The
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>>
>>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>>
>>>> released.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not
>>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>>
>>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>>> we
>>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>>> support
>>>> local communities.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>>
>>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>>
>>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>>> to "miss the train".
>>>>
>>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>>> we released.
>>>>
>>>>   From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>>> next train.
>>>>
>>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>>> Is that enough time?
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>
>>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the 4.0
>>> release.
>>>
>>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>>
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>>
>>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>>
>>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>>> absolutely
>>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>>
>>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy on
>>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>>
>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German
>>>>
>>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate
>>>>
>>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that
>>>>
>>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Juergen
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>



-- 

Ciao

Marcus

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Ricardo Berlasso <rg...@gmail.com>]

2013/7/14 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
> wrote:
> > I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
> > thread.
> >
> > For reference here is the old policy:
> >
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
> >
> > My new suggestion:
> >
> > 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
> >
> > 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
> >
> > 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
> > should be translated much better than 90%.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
> > average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
> > don't think so.
> >
> > 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or
> better
> > for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
> >
> > 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
> > should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here.
> They
> > want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
> > parts.
> >
> > And now, add your points.
> >
>
>
> I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
> open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
> the bar, not lowering it.
>
> If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
> there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
> There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
> a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
> then release it.
>
> On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
> active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
> will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
> reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
> release.
>
> In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
> and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
> is better than releasing something only partially done.
>
> Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
> then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.
>
> What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
> AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
> release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
> state and help translate.
>

Fully agree with everything you said.

For the UI, any percentage different from 100% is problematic: for the
average user it's not the same a 1% missing on an obscure database feature
than a 1% missing on the sidebar.

Regards
Ricardo


>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> > Marcus
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jogischmidt@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
> >>>
> >>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
> >>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
> >>>
> >>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
> >>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on
> the
> >>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
> >>>
> >>> mailing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> list...").
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times
> we
> >>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
> >>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature
> is
> >>>>>> incomplete
> >>>
> >>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
> >>>
> >>> The
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
> >>>
> >>> 4.0.0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> RC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
> >>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
> >>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
> >>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
> >>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
> >>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
> >>>
> >>> released.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
> >>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
> >>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
> >>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is
> not
> >>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
> >>>>> development could not be based on.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
> >>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
> >>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
> >>>>>
> >>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
> >>>
> >>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
> >>> we
> >>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
> >>> support
> >>> local communities.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
> >>>
> >>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
> >>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
> >>>
> >>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
> >>> to "miss the train".
> >>>
> >>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
> >>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
> >>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
> >>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
> >>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
> >>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
> >>> we released.
> >>>
> >>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
> >>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
> >>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
> >>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
> >>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
> >>> next train.
> >>>
> >>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
> >>> Is that enough time?
> >>>
> >>> -Rob
> >>>
> >>
> >> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
> >> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the
> 4.0
> >> release.
> >>
> >> Re the old stated "policy" on :
> >>
> >>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
> >>
> >> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
> >>
> >> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
> >> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
> >> absolutely
> >> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
> >>
> >> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy
> on
> >> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
> >>
> >> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released
> German
> >>>
> >>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not
> complete.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who
> participate
> >>>
> >>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but
> that
> >>>
> >>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Juergen
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new
> thread.
>
> For reference here is the old policy:
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>
> My new suggestion:
>
> 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help.
>
> 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better.
>
> 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This
> should be translated much better than 90%.
>
> Why?
>
> 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do
> average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I
> don't think so.
>
> 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better
> for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release.
>
> 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc.
> should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They
> want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated
> parts.
>
> And now, add your points.
>


I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation.   But I'd be
open to requiring 100% for help as well.   IMHO we should be raising
the bar, not lowering it.

If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then
there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%.
There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%.  It is only
a question of time.  I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and
then release it.

On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no
active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it.  If it
will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will
reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to
release.

In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two
and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that
is better than releasing something only partially done.

Also, there is the "slippery slope" here.  If we allow 90% complete
then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete.

What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of
AOO 4.0, in all languages that are "close", maybe 80% or 90%.  Not for
release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current
state and help translate.

Regards,

-Rob

> Marcus
>
>
>
> Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org>  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt<jo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat<
>>>
>>> imacat@mail.imacat.idv.tw>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
>>>>>>>>> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> UI translation is not complete:
>>>
>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an
>>>>>>> agreement that we need 100% for a release?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the
>>>>>> mailing list, and properly tagged ("if it does not happen on the
>>>
>>> mailing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> list...").
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we
>>>>>>> have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI
>>>>>>> [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is
>>>>>> incomplete
>>>
>>> https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state?
>>>
>>> The
>>>>>>
>>>>>> same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this
>>>
>>> 4.0.0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> RC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very
>>>>> sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous
>>>>> discussion. However, there are several issues of concern:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source
>>>>> conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to
>>>>> announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It
>>>>> would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version
>>>
>>> released.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September
>>>>> (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join
>>>>> our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in
>>>>> governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not
>>>>> available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their
>>>>> development could not be based on.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent.
>>>>> If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with
>>>>> certain amount, could it be OK to release it?
>>>>>
>>>> let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible.
>>>
>>> Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and
>>> we
>>> can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to
>>> support
>>> local communities.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is obviously some tension in our goals here:
>>>
>>> 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who
>>> can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc.
>>>
>>> 2) We also have some languages that are "almost" done and don't want
>>> to "miss the train".
>>>
>>> IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train
>>> leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon.  Maybe
>>> we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're
>>> making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of
>>> 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations).  Hopefully we all remember
>>> that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after
>>> we released.
>>>
>>>  From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in
>>> translating AOO to other languages.  There will always be another
>>> language that is "almost ready".  That is what success looks like.  We
>>> need to handle new translations when they are ready.  We can't hold up
>>> the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the
>>> next train.
>>>
>>> So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages?
>>> Is that enough time?
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>
>> This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping,
>> and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the 4.0
>> release.
>>
>> Re the old stated "policy" on :
>>
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
>>
>> If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this.
>>
>> But...I think we should  first discuss the policy. What levels of
>> translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we
>> absolutely
>> require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example.
>>
>> Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy on
>> the "Native Language" page on the project web site:
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German
>>>
>>> (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete.
>>>>
>>>> Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate
>>>
>>> in the project or at least in the translation part.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that
>>>
>>> is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juergen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org