You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com> on 2012/03/27 20:39:54 UTC
[RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Hi,
I would like to inform you where we are from my perspective and how I
think we can/should move forward.
2 show stopper issues are open now which should be fixed later this
week. We make good progress to clean up the RAT output
(http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/rat-output.html), we are
supporting Andrew where we can. Work on our NOTICE and LICENSE file is
also ongoing and we make good progress to integrate early feedback
before our first RC.
Translation
I am still not happy with the current situation around translations. I
know that it is not the problem of our translation volunteers (I am
happy to see the progress and interest) and that you all do your best. I
think it was a mistake to underestimate the Pootle issue and the
relating work... But we can't change it at the moment.
A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting. I
would like to propose the following.
UI
We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like
for "ru")
All other languages will we release a little bit later when more
translations are ready
HELP
For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
>95%.
And here the same we will release further languages based on availability.
That means we will start with a subset of languages first and will
release more languages with a 3.4.1 that we can address quite fast.
I still believe that a fast release is important for the public
reputation of our project and I don't see a problem with releasing more
languages later.
I would like to start building a RC candidate next week with the
languages that we have in place on Monday next week (April 2th).
Any opinions?
Juergen
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Jürgen Schmidt
<jo...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to inform you where we are from my perspective and how I
> think we can/should move forward.
>
> 2 show stopper issues are open now which should be fixed later this week.
> We make good progress to clean up the RAT output (http://ci.apache.org/**
> projects/openoffice/rat-**output.html<http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/rat-output.html>),
> we are supporting Andrew where we can. Work on our NOTICE and LICENSE file
> is also ongoing and we make good progress to integrate early feedback
> before our first RC.
>
> Translation
> I am still not happy with the current situation around translations. I
> know that it is not the problem of our translation volunteers (I am happy
> to see the progress and interest) and that you all do your best. I think it
> was a mistake to underestimate the Pootle issue and the relating work...
> But we can't change it at the moment.
>
> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting. I
> would like to propose the following.
>
> UI
> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
> for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like for
> "ru")
>
> All other languages will we release a little bit later when more
> translations are ready
>
> HELP
> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
> >95%.
>
> And here the same we will release further languages based on availability.
>
> That means we will start with a subset of languages first and will release
> more languages with a 3.4.1 that we can address quite fast.
>
> I still believe that a fast release is important for the public reputation
> of our project and I don't see a problem with releasing more languages
> later.
>
> I would like to start building a RC candidate next week with the languages
> that we have in place on Monday next week (April 2th).
>
>
+1
IMHO, whatever date we pick, there will always be a translation that is
"almost ready". This will be true next week. It will be true next month.
But if everything else is ready for a release, then I think we should have
a release. Otherwise we hold up the work that is ready.
But at the same time, I think we need a way to have new languages released
when they are ready. We cannot wait 6 months or something like that. We
should think about some model where a new translation can be tested and
approved for release quickly, say within 2 weeks of the translation being
completed. It is less painful to miss the train if you know that another
train will be leaving soon.
-Rob
> Any opinions?
>
> Juergen
>
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 03/28/2012 01:48 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 03/27/2012 10:46 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>
>>
>> On 03/27/2012 11:39 AM, � wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I would like to inform you where we are from my perspective and how I
>>> think we can/should move forward.
>>>
>>> 2 show stopper issues are open now which should be fixed later this
>>> week. We make good progress to clean up the RAT output
>>> (http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/rat-output.html), we are
>>> supporting Andrew where we can. Work on our NOTICE and LICENSE file is
>>> also ongoing and we make good progress to integrate early feedback
>>> before our first RC.
>>>
>>> Translation
>>> I am still not happy with the current situation around translations. I
>>> know that it is not the problem of our translation volunteers (I am
>>> happy to see the progress and interest) and that you all do your best.
>>> I think it was a mistake to underestimate the Pootle issue and the
>>> relating work... But we can't change it at the moment.
>>>
>>> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting. I
>>> would like to propose the following.
>>>
>>> UI
>>> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete
>>> translation for the UI (excepting the translation for the test
>>> automation tool like for "ru")
>>>
>>> All other languages will we release a little bit later when more
>>> translations are ready
>>>
>>> HELP
>>> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would
>>> accept >95%.
>>>
>>> And here the same we will release further languages based on
>>> availability.
>>>
>>> That means we will start with a subset of languages first and will
>>> release more languages with a 3.4.1 that we can address quite fast.
>>>
>>> I still believe that a fast release is important for the public
>>> reputation of our project and I don't see a problem with releasing
>>> more languages later.
>>>
>>> I would like to start building a RC candidate next week with the
>>> languages that we have in place on Monday next week (April 2th).
>>>
>>> Any opinions?
>>>
>>> Juergen
>> Juergen--
>>
>> I support your analysis and this plan. Some questions:
>>
>> * What is the proposed timeframe for the RC(s)?
>> I know logistically there was a some discussion about SourceForge's role
>> in the download. The timeline that was discussed led me to believe we
>> were at least a week or so out -- something about mid-April was
>> mentioned. Do think this is still accurate?
>>
>> * Right now the "Release Candidate " area of the web site's download
>> page...
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/all_rc.html
>>
>> is directed *back* to the main download page.
>
> Yes, I've changed it this way in order to concentrate the user's
> attention currently for OOo 3.3 only. And not for still remaining OOo
> 3.3 RC's or OOo 3.4 Beta.
>
>> Those of us doing web maintenance for the download areas will need some
>> assistance is determining the needed information (platforms, languages,
>> etc.)
>> that are detailed in http://www.openoffice.org/download/globalvars.js
>
> I can help with this.
>
>> so we can reconstruct the all_rc.html
>
> Of course I still have the previous webpage. So, it can be re-used for
> newer releases. ;-)
YAY! And, knowing you, I was sure the old version was safe and sound
some place. :)
>
>> If you already have this info, please feel free to update this page, or
>> send info so someone else can do it.
>
> A finally defined set of supported platforms and languages would help,
> indeed.
>
> Marcus
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Women and cats will do as they please,
and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."
-- Robert Heinlein
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 03/27/2012 10:46 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>
>
> On 03/27/2012 11:39 AM, � wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to inform you where we are from my perspective and how I
>> think we can/should move forward.
>>
>> 2 show stopper issues are open now which should be fixed later this
>> week. We make good progress to clean up the RAT output
>> (http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/rat-output.html), we are
>> supporting Andrew where we can. Work on our NOTICE and LICENSE file is
>> also ongoing and we make good progress to integrate early feedback
>> before our first RC.
>>
>> Translation
>> I am still not happy with the current situation around translations. I
>> know that it is not the problem of our translation volunteers (I am
>> happy to see the progress and interest) and that you all do your best.
>> I think it was a mistake to underestimate the Pootle issue and the
>> relating work... But we can't change it at the moment.
>>
>> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting. I
>> would like to propose the following.
>>
>> UI
>> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete
>> translation for the UI (excepting the translation for the test
>> automation tool like for "ru")
>>
>> All other languages will we release a little bit later when more
>> translations are ready
>>
>> HELP
>> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would
>> accept >95%.
>>
>> And here the same we will release further languages based on
>> availability.
>>
>> That means we will start with a subset of languages first and will
>> release more languages with a 3.4.1 that we can address quite fast.
>>
>> I still believe that a fast release is important for the public
>> reputation of our project and I don't see a problem with releasing
>> more languages later.
>>
>> I would like to start building a RC candidate next week with the
>> languages that we have in place on Monday next week (April 2th).
>>
>> Any opinions?
>>
>> Juergen
> Juergen--
>
> I support your analysis and this plan. Some questions:
>
> * What is the proposed timeframe for the RC(s)?
> I know logistically there was a some discussion about SourceForge's role
> in the download. The timeline that was discussed led me to believe we
> were at least a week or so out -- something about mid-April was
> mentioned. Do think this is still accurate?
>
> * Right now the "Release Candidate " area of the web site's download
> page...
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/all_rc.html
>
> is directed *back* to the main download page.
Yes, I've changed it this way in order to concentrate the user's
attention currently for OOo 3.3 only. And not for still remaining OOo
3.3 RC's or OOo 3.4 Beta.
> Those of us doing web maintenance for the download areas will need some
> assistance is determining the needed information (platforms, languages,
> etc.)
> that are detailed in http://www.openoffice.org/download/globalvars.js
I can help with this.
> so we can reconstruct the all_rc.html
Of course I still have the previous webpage. So, it can be re-used for
newer releases. ;-)
> If you already have this info, please feel free to update this page, or
> send info so someone else can do it.
A finally defined set of supported platforms and languages would help,
indeed.
Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 03/27/2012 11:39 AM, � wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to inform you where we are from my perspective and how I
> think we can/should move forward.
>
> 2 show stopper issues are open now which should be fixed later this
> week. We make good progress to clean up the RAT output
> (http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/rat-output.html), we are
> supporting Andrew where we can. Work on our NOTICE and LICENSE file is
> also ongoing and we make good progress to integrate early feedback
> before our first RC.
>
> Translation
> I am still not happy with the current situation around translations. I
> know that it is not the problem of our translation volunteers (I am
> happy to see the progress and interest) and that you all do your best.
> I think it was a mistake to underestimate the Pootle issue and the
> relating work... But we can't change it at the moment.
>
> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting. I
> would like to propose the following.
>
> UI
> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete
> translation for the UI (excepting the translation for the test
> automation tool like for "ru")
>
> All other languages will we release a little bit later when more
> translations are ready
>
> HELP
> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would
> accept >95%.
>
> And here the same we will release further languages based on
> availability.
>
> That means we will start with a subset of languages first and will
> release more languages with a 3.4.1 that we can address quite fast.
>
> I still believe that a fast release is important for the public
> reputation of our project and I don't see a problem with releasing
> more languages later.
>
> I would like to start building a RC candidate next week with the
> languages that we have in place on Monday next week (April 2th).
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Juergen
Juergen--
I support your analysis and this plan. Some questions:
* What is the proposed timeframe for the RC(s)?
I know logistically there was a some discussion about SourceForge's role
in the download. The timeline that was discussed led me to believe we
were at least a week or so out -- something about mid-April was
mentioned. Do think this is still accurate?
* Right now the "Release Candidate " area of the web site's download page...
http://www.openoffice.org/download/all_rc.html
is directed *back* to the main download page.
Those of us doing web maintenance for the download areas will need some
assistance is determining the needed information (platforms, languages,
etc.)
that are detailed in http://www.openoffice.org/download/globalvars.js
so we can reconstruct the all_rc.html
If you already have this info, please feel free to update this page, or
send info so someone else can do it.
Thanks...
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Women and cats will do as they please,
and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."
-- Robert Heinlein
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
<jo...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
>
> On 3/28/12 12:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>> UI
>>> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
>>> for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like
>>> for "ru")
>>> HELP
>>> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
>>> >95%.
>>>
>>
>> These figures seem very high, we usually required > 80% (both UI and
>> Help), see http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Languages<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Languages>
>>
>>
> thanks for this feedback, I wasn't aware of this numbers and it seems that
> my own expectations are higher than what we had before. I am open for that
> and we can reduce the numbers but doesn't it make sense to have 100% for UI
> and a lower number like the 80-85% for help. Help is not so important from
> my point view (who never used help and preferred google) but I think the UI
> should be complete.
>
> I am eager to learn from others and their experience and we should define
> together some boundaries for the future.
>
>
>
Some things to consider:
- What does the brand "OpenOffice" represent? What does it mean to the
user? If we think it mean (among other things) "quality" and "good
localization support", then there are limits to what we can release and not
harm the brand identity. For example, we cannot release a French
translation that is only 10% done. It is all about meeting user
expectations. Current OOo users have expectations. And people who have
never used OpenOffice also have expectations.
- Instead of holding back partial translations, one approach would be to
label them in a special way, so we are setting accurate user expectations.
For example, complete translations might be called "gold", 90% translations
"silver" and 80% "bronze". Less than 80% might be "beta" releases only.
Or some other similar naming schema. This guides the user what to expect,
but also may attract help for the translations on where their help is most
needed.
-Rob
> And, now that https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=118895<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118895>is
>> fixed (thanks!) the Italian version, even if at 95%-99%, would
>> definitely be ready to ship. We will reach 100% anyway (Paolo knows more
>> but there are more than a dozen vounteers so it won't be a problem for
>> us), but I'm speaking in general: excluding a language at 95%-99%
>> wouldn't make sense.
>>
>> If there are concerns about problems in the translation process/data,
>> then I'd prefer to distribute only builds for which we can identify a
>> volunteer who takes care of testing that the translation is OK in the
>> common use cases.
>>
>
> Exactly that is what I have in mind we will only ship languages where
> volunteers have shown up so far.
>
> Juergen
>
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 03/28/2012 08:49 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> On 3/28/12 12:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting.
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>>> UI
>>> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
>>> for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like
>>> for "ru")
>>> HELP
>>> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
>>> >95%.
>>
>> These figures seem very high, we usually required > 80% (both UI and
>> Help), see http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Languages
>>
>
> thanks for this feedback, I wasn't aware of this numbers and it seems
> that my own expectations are higher than what we had before. I am open
> for that and we can reduce the numbers but doesn't it make sense to have
> 100% for UI and a lower number like the 80-85% for help. Help is not so
> important from my point view (who never used help and preferred google)
> but I think the UI should be complete.
>
> I am eager to learn from others and their experience and we should
> define together some boundaries for the future.
Let me allow to take a look into the past. ;-)
OOo 3.3
Full install sets:
This was done with 100 % for UI and Help with 100 - 0 % (e.g., we had
never a translated Help in Arabic, however we have made a release for
this language).
There were also some exceptions with lower translation ratio because:
the NL community was very eager with their L10N work and wanted to have
a release somehow, the NL community had very good ratio in the past and
exceptionally not this time, etc.).
Langpacks:
This was very less restrictive. Langpacks were done even with 0 % Help.
The main focus was for the UI with a limit at ~80 %.
General:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements
Finally, I recommend to *orientate* on these requirements:
100 - ~95 % UI and Help ratio for full install builds.
100 - ~80 % UI ratio for langpack builds.
This is what our users know from past releases (at least from the Wiki
or other posts) and would expect for the next release. Of course we can
change the requirements. But only after more detailed discussions and a
published outcome (e.g., in the Wiki, blog post).
OOo 3.4 Beta
Full install sets:
Builds were done only for en-US.
Langpacks:
The ratios for the Beta release was a bit worse as IMHO the localization
phase was not finished before the big stop. So, Sun/Oracle has shown a
bit more flexibility and has released them anyhow.
>> And, now that https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118895 is
>> fixed (thanks!) the Italian version, even if at 95%-99%, would
>> definitely be ready to ship. We will reach 100% anyway (Paolo knows more
>> but there are more than a dozen vounteers so it won't be a problem for
>> us), but I'm speaking in general: excluding a language at 95%-99%
>> wouldn't make sense.
+1
>> If there are concerns about problems in the translation process/data,
>> then I'd prefer to distribute only builds for which we can identify a
>> volunteer who takes care of testing that the translation is OK in the
>> common use cases.
>
> Exactly that is what I have in mind we will only ship languages where
> volunteers have shown up so far.
>
> Juergen
+1
Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
Hi Andrea,
On 3/28/12 12:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting.
>
> Exactly.
>
>> UI
>> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
>> for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like
>> for "ru")
>> HELP
>> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
>> >95%.
>
> These figures seem very high, we usually required > 80% (both UI and
> Help), see http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Languages
>
thanks for this feedback, I wasn't aware of this numbers and it seems
that my own expectations are higher than what we had before. I am open
for that and we can reduce the numbers but doesn't it make sense to have
100% for UI and a lower number like the 80-85% for help. Help is not so
important from my point view (who never used help and preferred google)
but I think the UI should be complete.
I am eager to learn from others and their experience and we should
define together some boundaries for the future.
> And, now that https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118895 is
> fixed (thanks!) the Italian version, even if at 95%-99%, would
> definitely be ready to ship. We will reach 100% anyway (Paolo knows more
> but there are more than a dozen vounteers so it won't be a problem for
> us), but I'm speaking in general: excluding a language at 95%-99%
> wouldn't make sense.
>
> If there are concerns about problems in the translation process/data,
> then I'd prefer to distribute only builds for which we can identify a
> volunteer who takes care of testing that the translation is OK in the
> common use cases.
Exactly that is what I have in mind we will only ship languages where
volunteers have shown up so far.
Juergen
Re: [RELEASE]: status update where we are and plan to move forward
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> A RC with en-US only is not really what our community is expecting.
Exactly.
> UI
> We will include all languages where we have a 100% complete translation
> for the UI (excepting the translation for the test automation tool like
> for "ru")
> HELP
> For help I would not really rely on a 100% translation and would accept
> >95%.
These figures seem very high, we usually required > 80% (both UI and
Help), see http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Languages
And, now that https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118895 is
fixed (thanks!) the Italian version, even if at 95%-99%, would
definitely be ready to ship. We will reach 100% anyway (Paolo knows more
but there are more than a dozen vounteers so it won't be a problem for
us), but I'm speaking in general: excluding a language at 95%-99%
wouldn't make sense.
If there are concerns about problems in the translation process/data,
then I'd prefer to distribute only builds for which we can identify a
volunteer who takes care of testing that the translation is OK in the
common use cases.
Regards,
Andrea.