You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@httpd.apache.org by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> on 2016/10/19 13:24:25 UTC
Translations (IRC conversation)
(Summarizing a conversation from IRC)
ezra-s (Daniel Ferradal) is beginning to work on our Spanish docs
translation. This led to discussion of a number of points surrounding
translations:
* There are some (numerous?) .es files in 2.4 that are not in trunk.
These need to be identified, and where appropriate, copied/moved into
trunk, so that they are not lost in the future. Translation work should
(usually) happen in trunk first, and then be (intelligently - of course
some stuff is trunk-only) copied to 2.4 and possibly (?) 2.2. We have
apparently done a poor job of communicating and policing this, and need
to update our translation docs accordingly. The usual catchphrase is,
Upstream First.
* We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it. Discussion?
* It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
"Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
having a less conversational style, would come later.
* All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers. But for certain
languages (Spanish, French, Japanese, Chinese, Russian) it would seem
that we have an enormous pool of users to draw from. Perhaps time to do
some recruiting on users@? I believe we should first address the above
items, though, so that they're coming into a well-documented encouraging
environment, rather than picking up a lot of abandoned partially
translated things. Indeed, it might be good to go ahead and drop entire
languages from trunk, so that a new translator has a clean slate to work
with. I know I find that less frustrating, myself.
Please discuss, so I'm not just talking to myself. :-)
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>.
[Reporting a discussion happened on IRC]
2016-10-19 15:24 GMT+02:00 Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>:
>
>
> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it. Discussion?
>
I would take it a bit further and keep only a few languages supported, line
en-fr-es. It takes a lot of work just to keep en up to date and in sync
with users' expectations and new features/fix of httpd, keeping out-of-sync
or stale documentations is misleading and not really useful imho.
>
> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
> having a less conversational style, would come later.
>
+1
>
> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers. But for certain
> languages (Spanish, French, Japanese, Chinese, Russian) it would seem
> that we have an enormous pool of users to draw from. Perhaps time to do
> some recruiting on users@? I believe we should first address the above
> items, though, so that they're coming into a well-documented encouraging
> environment, rather than picking up a lot of abandoned partially
> translated things. Indeed, it might be good to go ahead and drop entire
> languages from trunk, so that a new translator has a clean slate to work
> with. I know I find that less frustrating, myself.
>
Again +1 to drop languages and restart from scratch if we find translators.
Thanks a lot!
Luca
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luis Gil de Bernabé <lj...@googlemail.com>.
Hello Daniel
And of course welcome, here its a useful link to keep track on the
translation status of the branches:
http://people.apache.org/~takashi/translation-status/test.html
:)
Si tienes alguna duda, como trductor Español también no dudes en
contactarme.
Regards.
Linkedin: https://linkd.in/Ljjt8L <http://linkd.in/Ljjt8L>
Twitter : https://twitter.com/luigy_tspg
On 20 October 2016 at 09:50, Daniel <da...@ezra-s.net> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm Daniel Ferradal, as Richard Bowen says, I plan to help translating to
> Spanish in the best way I can.
>
> To me this is all new, so when I saw in the httpd.apache.org which is the
> method you guys use to define the documentation, I did a checkout of
> httpd-2.4 and trunk and saw 2.4 had fewer translations, and so I thought it
> would be a good place to start.
>
> As Richard mentions, right now this is the list of trunk "html.es" files,
> the ones marked with * are not present in httpd-2.4.
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/handler.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/howto/auth.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/howto/access.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/invoking.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/new_features_2_2.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/glossary.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/index.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/filter.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mpm.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/programs/index.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/faq/index.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/custom-error.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/sitemap.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/stopping.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/new_features_2_4.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/bind.html.es *
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/core.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/quickreference.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/directives.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/index.html.es
> ./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/install.html.es
>
> Seeing the difference I started translating one sample in httpd-2.4, if
> you guys like it I will just keep on working with trunk, httpd-2.4 or
> whatever you guys prefer.
>
> In my humble opinion it would be good to have all actual documentation, at
> least for 2.4 translated, since that's probably the most used docs, but
> just tell me where to point and I'll go. Rich told me to concentrate on
> trunk before anything else but if you want to point me to specific files,
> just tell me.
>
> Here is my first sample (bind.xml.es for httpd-2.4) , hope you guys like
> it:
>
>
>
>
> 2016-10-19 15:24 GMT+02:00 Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>:
>
>> (Summarizing a conversation from IRC)
>>
>> ezra-s (Daniel Ferradal) is beginning to work on our Spanish docs
>> translation. This led to discussion of a number of points surrounding
>> translations:
>>
>> * There are some (numerous?) .es files in 2.4 that are not in trunk.
>> These need to be identified, and where appropriate, copied/moved into
>> trunk, so that they are not lost in the future. Translation work should
>> (usually) happen in trunk first, and then be (intelligently - of course
>> some stuff is trunk-only) copied to 2.4 and possibly (?) 2.2. We have
>> apparently done a poor job of communicating and policing this, and need
>> to update our translation docs accordingly. The usual catchphrase is,
>> Upstream First.
>>
>> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
>> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
>> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
>> Discussion?
>>
>> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
>> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
>> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
>> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
>> having a less conversational style, would come later.
>>
>> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
>> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
>> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
>> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers. But for certain
>> languages (Spanish, French, Japanese, Chinese, Russian) it would seem
>> that we have an enormous pool of users to draw from. Perhaps time to do
>> some recruiting on users@? I believe we should first address the above
>> items, though, so that they're coming into a well-documented encouraging
>> environment, rather than picking up a lot of abandoned partially
>> translated things. Indeed, it might be good to go ahead and drop entire
>> languages from trunk, so that a new translator has a clean slate to work
>> with. I know I find that less frustrating, myself.
>>
>> Please discuss, so I'm not just talking to myself. :-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Daniel Ferradal*
> IT Specialist
>
> email daniel at ezra-s.net
> linkedin es.linkedin.com/in/danielferradal
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Daniel <da...@ezra-s.net>.
Hello,
I'm Daniel Ferradal, as Richard Bowen says, I plan to help translating to
Spanish in the best way I can.
To me this is all new, so when I saw in the httpd.apache.org which is the
method you guys use to define the documentation, I did a checkout of
httpd-2.4 and trunk and saw 2.4 had fewer translations, and so I thought it
would be a good place to start.
As Richard mentions, right now this is the list of trunk "html.es" files,
the ones marked with * are not present in httpd-2.4.
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/handler.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/howto/auth.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/howto/access.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/invoking.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/new_features_2_2.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/glossary.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/index.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/filter.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mpm.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/programs/index.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/faq/index.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/custom-error.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/sitemap.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/stopping.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/new_features_2_4.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/bind.html.es *
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/core.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/quickreference.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/directives.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/mod/index.html.es
./httpd-trunk/docs/manual/install.html.es
Seeing the difference I started translating one sample in httpd-2.4, if you
guys like it I will just keep on working with trunk, httpd-2.4 or whatever
you guys prefer.
In my humble opinion it would be good to have all actual documentation, at
least for 2.4 translated, since that's probably the most used docs, but
just tell me where to point and I'll go. Rich told me to concentrate on
trunk before anything else but if you want to point me to specific files,
just tell me.
Here is my first sample (bind.xml.es for httpd-2.4) , hope you guys like it:
2016-10-19 15:24 GMT+02:00 Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>:
> (Summarizing a conversation from IRC)
>
> ezra-s (Daniel Ferradal) is beginning to work on our Spanish docs
> translation. This led to discussion of a number of points surrounding
> translations:
>
> * There are some (numerous?) .es files in 2.4 that are not in trunk.
> These need to be identified, and where appropriate, copied/moved into
> trunk, so that they are not lost in the future. Translation work should
> (usually) happen in trunk first, and then be (intelligently - of course
> some stuff is trunk-only) copied to 2.4 and possibly (?) 2.2. We have
> apparently done a poor job of communicating and policing this, and need
> to update our translation docs accordingly. The usual catchphrase is,
> Upstream First.
>
> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it. Discussion?
>
> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
> having a less conversational style, would come later.
>
> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers. But for certain
> languages (Spanish, French, Japanese, Chinese, Russian) it would seem
> that we have an enormous pool of users to draw from. Perhaps time to do
> some recruiting on users@? I believe we should first address the above
> items, though, so that they're coming into a well-documented encouraging
> environment, rather than picking up a lot of abandoned partially
> translated things. Indeed, it might be good to go ahead and drop entire
> languages from trunk, so that a new translator has a clean slate to work
> with. I know I find that less frustrating, myself.
>
> Please discuss, so I'm not just talking to myself. :-)
>
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>
>
--
*Daniel Ferradal*
IT Specialist
email daniel at ezra-s.net
linkedin es.linkedin.com/in/danielferradal
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luis Gil de Bernabé <lj...@googlemail.com>.
Hello Rich,
According to the first point could be may fault? im not sure, because i
have been working on the trunk since early beginning, and i migrate some
files to the 2.4 and older doc versions when i don´t forget of course haha.
Old stuff point, in my opinion it depends on how old this is, if its more
than 1 year maybe its too old? we have to set a "pass time" maybe.
The point you make suggesting to start on the How to and G.S guides, you
actually read my mind, (i´m actually doing so) but of course i did´t
started whit the files that were already outdated ;). for the new people
that join the community we should added to our starting guide of the doc
project, right?
hope to write more.
Have a nice day fellows
Linkedin: https://linkd.in/Ljjt8L <http://linkd.in/Ljjt8L>
Twitter : https://twitter.com/luigy_tspg
On 19 October 2016 at 15:24, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> (Summarizing a conversation from IRC)
>
> ezra-s (Daniel Ferradal) is beginning to work on our Spanish docs
> translation. This led to discussion of a number of points surrounding
> translations:
>
> * There are some (numerous?) .es files in 2.4 that are not in trunk.
> These need to be identified, and where appropriate, copied/moved into
> trunk, so that they are not lost in the future. Translation work should
> (usually) happen in trunk first, and then be (intelligently - of course
> some stuff is trunk-only) copied to 2.4 and possibly (?) 2.2. We have
> apparently done a poor job of communicating and policing this, and need
> to update our translation docs accordingly. The usual catchphrase is,
> Upstream First.
>
> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it. Discussion?
>
> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
> having a less conversational style, would come later.
>
> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers. But for certain
> languages (Spanish, French, Japanese, Chinese, Russian) it would seem
> that we have an enormous pool of users to draw from. Perhaps time to do
> some recruiting on users@? I believe we should first address the above
> items, though, so that they're coming into a well-documented encouraging
> environment, rather than picking up a lot of abandoned partially
> translated things. Indeed, it might be good to go ahead and drop entire
> languages from trunk, so that a new translator has a clean slate to work
> with. I know I find that less frustrating, myself.
>
> Please discuss, so I'm not just talking to myself. :-)
>
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>
>
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 10/20/2016 03:36 PM, Andr Malo wrote:
> * Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>
>> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
>> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
>> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
>> Discussion?
>
> Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away. I'm
> proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current" solution
> instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make that happen.
>
>
>> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
>> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
>> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
>> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
>> having a less conversational style, would come later.
>
> Hmm. People have itches to scratch. If at all, it should be a very weak
> recommendation.
Yes, absolutely. More like when people say "where is the best place to
start" we can give that recommendation. But if someone wants to
translate mod_imagemap docs, go ahead.
>
>> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
>> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
>> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
>> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers.
>
> Maybe, maybe not. I think, the project itself lost traction in terms of
> contributions (from non-developers). It's not that cool anymore (or the hot
> shit, take your pick).
>
> nd
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>.
2016-11-29 18:20 GMT+01:00 André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>:
> * Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > On 11/20/2016 05:20 AM, Luca Toscano wrote:
> > > My view from takashi's status:
> > >
> > > 1) da, de, pt-b, ru, ko and zh-cn should be put in a holding area and
> > > not shown to the users.
> > > 2) not sure about tr and ja, it would be awesome to ping the last
> > > translators to figure out if they are willing to restart their work.
> > > 3) es and fr seems in a good shape (and we have active translators
> \o/).
> >
> > +1 to the above three designations. Erring on the side of leaving stuff
> > is fine when we're not sure. The languages you mention, I think we're
> > sure, and should drop from trunk and 2.4, as you say.
>
> Ok, there seem to be an unclear consensus (or we suck at being precise).
>
> I'll take the "drop" as "put into holding area" and will invest some time
> to
> adapt the build process to hide the translations until they're more
> current.
>
>
Thanks a lot, let me know if I can help!
Luca
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Rich Bowen wrote:
> On 11/20/2016 05:20 AM, Luca Toscano wrote:
> > My view from takashi's status:
> >
> > 1) da, de, pt-b, ru, ko and zh-cn should be put in a holding area and
> > not shown to the users.
> > 2) not sure about tr and ja, it would be awesome to ping the last
> > translators to figure out if they are willing to restart their work.
> > 3) es and fr seems in a good shape (and we have active translators \o/).
>
> +1 to the above three designations. Erring on the side of leaving stuff
> is fine when we're not sure. The languages you mention, I think we're
> sure, and should drop from trunk and 2.4, as you say.
Ok, there seem to be an unclear consensus (or we suck at being precise).
I'll take the "drop" as "put into holding area" and will invest some time to
adapt the build process to hide the translations until they're more current.
nd
--
Gib' mal folgendes in die Kommandozeile ein (und einen Moment warten):
net send localhost "Buuuh!"
Na, erschreckt? -- Markus Becker in mpdsh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 11/20/2016 05:20 AM, Luca Toscano wrote:
> My view from takashi's status:
>
> 1) da, de, pt-b, ru, ko and zh-cn should be put in a holding area and
> not shown to the users.
> 2) not sure about tr and ja, it would be awesome to ping the last
> translators to figure out if they are willing to restart their work.
> 3) es and fr seems in a good shape (and we have active translators \o/).
+1 to the above three designations. Erring on the side of leaving stuff
is fine when we're not sure. The languages you mention, I think we're
sure, and should drop from trunk and 2.4, as you say.
--Rich
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>.
Hi Vincent,
2016-11-18 14:41 GMT+01:00 Vincent Deffontaines <vi...@gryzor.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Lucien and I have discussed off-list, regarding the 2.4 .fr doc
> translation.
> Lucien has provided an impressive work of .fr translation during the last
> monthes+years, which is only lacking review.
> We have many 2.4 .fr translated docs in the https://apache-doc-fr.gryzor.c
> om/apache-doc-fr
> SVN repository, that we only need to validate and commit.
>
> We'll be providing an effort so that we can validate and commit them into
> 2.4. This will reduce greatly the big diff on 2.4 status on /~takashi's
> status.
>
>
thanks a lot for this effort, fr is already one of the best up to date
non-en manuals, having it more complete it would improve our (french) users
experience even more.
Just to be clear, I didn't mean to propose to cut off whatever is not in
sync from /~takashi's status, but only to remove translations that are (or
seems to be) in an abandoned state and officially support only a subset of
translations. Of course in case of new translators joining the project we
could review the supported languages, but it should be clear to them how
much work it is to be done (refresh the most of a manual vs only helping
out with some documents).
My view from takashi's status:
1) da, de, pt-b, ru, ko and zh-cn should be put in a holding area and not
shown to the users.
2) not sure about tr and ja, it would be awesome to ping the last
translators to figure out if they are willing to restart their work.
3) es and fr seems in a good shape (and we have active translators \o/).
Opinions are welcome, it would be really great to reach an agreement during
the next days :)
Thanks!
Luc
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Vincent Deffontaines <vi...@gryzor.com>.
Hi,
Lucien and I have discussed off-list, regarding the 2.4 .fr doc
translation.
Lucien has provided an impressive work of .fr translation during the
last monthes+years, which is only lacking review.
We have many 2.4 .fr translated docs in the
https://apache-doc-fr.gryzor.com/apache-doc-fr
SVN repository, that we only need to validate and commit.
We'll be providing an effort so that we can validate and commit them
into 2.4. This will reduce greatly the big diff on 2.4 status on
/~takashi's status.
Cheers,
Vincent
Le 2016-11-18 12:08, Luca Toscano a �crit�:
> 2016-11-15 23:22 GMT+01:00 Andr� Malo <nd...@perlig.de>:
>
>> * Luca Toscano wrote:
>>
>>> 2016-10-23 12:55 GMT+02:00 Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>:
>>>> 2016-10-20 21:46 GMT+02:00 Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:36:51PM +0200, Andr� Malo wrote:
>>>>> > * Rich Bowen wrote:
>>>>> > > * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We
>> should
>>>>> > > drop them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means?
>> If a
>>>>>
>>>>> translation
>>>>>
>>>>> > > hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping
>> it.
>>>>> > > Discussion?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them
>> away.
>>>>> > I'm proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until
>> current"
>>>>> > solution instead. I can also take a look at the build system
>> to make
>>>>> > that happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like a much better solution.
>>>>
>>>> I'd be +1 only if there is a clean way to mark these files as
>>>> "old/stale/out-of-sync", together with a clean statement/note
>> somewhere
>>>> about what to do with them in the medium longer term (even in a
>> page
>>>> like https://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/ [1]).
>>>
>>> Bump :)
>>>
>>> Can we move forward removing some old and outdated documentations
>> from
>>> the docs?
>>
>> Sure. Is there a consensus about how?
>
> Only ideas.. For example, we could start from
> http://home.apache.org/~takashi/translation-status/test.html#2.4:
> there are a lot of languages that are out of sync, we should just not
> publish them anymore in my opinion.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Luca
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/
--
What is it you need, that makes your heart beat ?
Do you really know, cause it doesn't show.
New Order - Round & round
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>.
2016-11-15 23:22 GMT+01:00 André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>:
> * Luca Toscano wrote:
>
> > 2016-10-23 12:55 GMT+02:00 Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>:
> > > 2016-10-20 21:46 GMT+02:00 Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>:
> > >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:36:51PM +0200, André Malo wrote:
> > >> > * Rich Bowen wrote:
> > >> > > * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should
> > >> > > drop them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a
> > >>
> > >> translation
> > >>
> > >> > > hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
> > >> > > Discussion?
> > >> >
> > >> > Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away.
> > >> > I'm proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current"
> > >> > solution instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make
> > >> > that happen.
> > >>
> > >> Sounds like a much better solution.
> > >
> > > I'd be +1 only if there is a clean way to mark these files as
> > > "old/stale/out-of-sync", together with a clean statement/note somewhere
> > > about what to do with them in the medium longer term (even in a page
> > > like https://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/).
> >
> > Bump :)
> >
> > Can we move forward removing some old and outdated documentations from
> > the docs?
>
> Sure. Is there a consensus about how?
>
Only ideas.. For example, we could start from
http://home.apache.org/~takashi/translation-status/test.html#2.4: there are
a lot of languages that are out of sync, we should just not publish them
anymore in my opinion.
WDYT?
Luca
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Luca Toscano wrote:
> 2016-10-23 12:55 GMT+02:00 Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>:
> > 2016-10-20 21:46 GMT+02:00 Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>:
> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:36:51PM +0200, André Malo wrote:
> >> > * Rich Bowen wrote:
> >> > > * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should
> >> > > drop them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a
> >>
> >> translation
> >>
> >> > > hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
> >> > > Discussion?
> >> >
> >> > Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away.
> >> > I'm proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current"
> >> > solution instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make
> >> > that happen.
> >>
> >> Sounds like a much better solution.
> >
> > I'd be +1 only if there is a clean way to mark these files as
> > "old/stale/out-of-sync", together with a clean statement/note somewhere
> > about what to do with them in the medium longer term (even in a page
> > like https://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/).
>
> Bump :)
>
> Can we move forward removing some old and outdated documentations from
> the docs?
Sure. Is there a consensus about how?
nd
--
"Umfassendes Werk (auch fuer Umsteiger vom Apache 1.3)"
-- aus einer Rezension
<http://pub.perlig.de/books.html#apache2>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>.
2016-10-23 12:55 GMT+02:00 Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> 2016-10-20 21:46 GMT+02:00 Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:36:51PM +0200, André Malo wrote:
>> > * Rich Bowen wrote:
>> > > * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
>> > > them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a
>> translation
>> > > hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
>> > > Discussion?
>> >
>> > Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away. I'm
>> > proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current" solution
>> > instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make that happen.
>> >
>> Sounds like a much better solution.
>>
>
> I'd be +1 only if there is a clean way to mark these files as
> "old/stale/out-of-sync", together with a clean statement/note somewhere
> about what to do with them in the medium longer term (even in a page like
> https://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/).
>
>
Bump :)
Can we move forward removing some old and outdated documentations from the
docs?
Luca
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>.
2016-10-20 21:46 GMT+02:00 Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:36:51PM +0200, André Malo wrote:
> > * Rich Bowen wrote:
> > > * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> > > them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> > > hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
> > > Discussion?
> >
> > Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away. I'm
> > proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current" solution
> > instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make that happen.
> >
> Sounds like a much better solution.
>
I'd be +1 only if there is a clean way to mark these files as
"old/stale/out-of-sync", together with a clean statement/note somewhere
about what to do with them in the medium longer term (even in a page like
https://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/).
> >
> > > * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> > > this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> > > new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> > > is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers.
> >
> > Maybe, maybe not. I think, the project itself lost traction in terms of
> > contributions (from non-developers). It's not that cool anymore (or the
> hot
> > shit, take your pick).
> >
> I think you're right. httpd moves slower too.
>
Can we do something about it? It seems like other "cool" projects are so
successful not only because of the good quality of the product but also of
its marketing strategy.
Thanks!
Luca
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>.
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:36:51PM +0200, Andr Malo wrote:
> * Rich Bowen wrote:
> > * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> > them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> > hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
> > Discussion?
>
> Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away. I'm
> proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current" solution
> instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make that happen.
>
Sounds like a much better solution.
>
> > * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> > this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> > new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> > is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers.
>
> Maybe, maybe not. I think, the project itself lost traction in terms of
> contributions (from non-developers). It's not that cool anymore (or the hot
> shit, take your pick).
>
I think you're right. httpd moves slower too.
vh
Mads Toftum
--
http://flickr.com/photos/q42/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Translations (IRC conversation)
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Rich Bowen wrote:
> * We have translations that are grossly out of date. We should drop
> them. It remains only to define what "tool old" means? If a translation
> hasn't been touched since 2.4.0, I would recommend dropping it.
> Discussion?
Guilty... However, I think, it would be waste to throw them away. I'm
proposing a "do not transform (and remove html) until current" solution
instead. I can also take a look at the build system to make that happen.
> * It also occurs to me that we should make specific recommendations of
> which docs should be translated first. For example, I think that the
> "Getting Started" doc, and the "HowTo" docs, would be good places to
> start, while the module docs, being more about technical detail and
> having a less conversational style, would come later.
Hmm. People have itches to scratch. If at all, it should be a very weak
recommendation.
> * All of this hinges on actually getting translators. It *seems* that
> this used to be easier, but lately we have really stunk at attracting
> new translators. I think that this might be because our review process
> is so rigorous, and it's hard to find reviewers.
Maybe, maybe not. I think, the project itself lost traction in terms of
contributions (from non-developers). It's not that cool anymore (or the hot
shit, take your pick).
nd
--
"Das Verhalten von Gates hatte mir bewiesen, dass ich auf ihn und seine
beiden Gefährten nicht zu zählen brauchte" -- Karl May, "Winnetou III"
Im Westen was neues: <http://pub.perlig.de/books.html#apache2>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org