You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to l10n@openoffice.apache.org by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> on 2013/04/22 20:54:35 UTC
Translation for AOO 4.0
Hi,
I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
immediately.
I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
impression of how much work we have to do.
For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
start with the work.
I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
Pootle server.
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 23 April 2013 18:34, Dick Groskamp <th...@quicknet.nl> wrote:
> Op 22-4-2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt schreef:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>> immediately.
>>
>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>
>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>
>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>> start with the work.
>>
>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>> Pootle server.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<l1...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.**org<l1...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>
>>
>>
>> Juergen,
>
> I've assesed a part of the strings in the "old" POOTLE for Dutch.
>
> I agree, whit you, that a lot of the translations are already available
> and now, due to replacement, probably are marked "fuzzy"
> A quick scan learned me that approx. 50% of the translations is already
> available and only need a (quick) review
> That shall reduce the needed time for translations.
>
> Could you give us an idea of when the "new" POOTLE should be available ?
>
it is ready for test at translate-vm2.apache.org
go-live should problaly be within a week or so, depending on how many
problems we run into and my available time.
BUT the new pootle does not bring a lot of new features, the really new
features will come when we activate genLang (the new l10n process).
rgds
Jan I.
>
> --
> DiGro
>
> Windows 7 and OpenOffice.org 3.3
> Scanned with Ziggo uitgebreide Internetbeveiliging (F-Secure)
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<l1...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.**org<l1...@openoffice.apache.org>
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Dick Groskamp <th...@quicknet.nl>.
Op 22-4-2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt schreef:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> immediately.
>
> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> impression of how much work we have to do.
>
> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>
> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> start with the work.
>
> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> Pootle server.
>
> Juergen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
>
Juergen,
I've assesed a part of the strings in the "old" POOTLE for Dutch.
I agree, whit you, that a lot of the translations are already available
and now, due to replacement, probably are marked "fuzzy"
A quick scan learned me that approx. 50% of the translations is already
available and only need a (quick) review
That shall reduce the needed time for translations.
Could you give us an idea of when the "new" POOTLE should be available ?
--
DiGro
Windows 7 and OpenOffice.org 3.3
Scanned with Ziggo uitgebreide Internetbeveiliging (F-Secure)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 5/6/13 9:41 PM, janI wrote:
> On 6 May 2013 20:46, Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net> wrote:
>
>> 2013/5/6 janI <ja...@apache.org>
>>
>>> On 6 May 2013 18:16, Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/6/13 5:49 PM, Anton Meixome wrote:
>>>>>> 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Further languages will be merged as well.
>>>>>>>>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I
>>> would
>>>>>>>>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it
>>>>> already,
>>>>>>>>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are
>>> (besides
>>>>>>>> the ones I already see at
>>> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
>>>> ):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Lithuanian (lt)
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
>>>>>>>> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
>>>>>>>> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a
>> very
>>>> low
>>>>>> Pootle's performance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time
>> until
>>>> the
>>>>>> next string is accesible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can somebody check this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend to wait some further days, we are working on an update of
>>>>> the pootle server.
>>>>> I mainly setup the new projects to be able to produce po files for
>>>>> people who prefer to work offline.
>>>>>
>>>>> Juergen
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ah, ok Juergen. An update will be a great notice.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The server has been dumping databases for the last 3 days, and actually
>> you
>>> are lucky just to a "long time" most times I get timeout.
>>>
>>> The online database has been moved to the new server (status sunday), and
>>> all changes after that point will not be automatically moved. Especially
>>> because we have a database error making it practically impossible to dump
>>> the translations to disk.
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>>
>>
>> Ok, Jani,
>>
>> Thanx for the advise. I will lost a few working hours, but I don't worry
>> about.
>> Now I'm working off-line for some files with many changes.
>>
>> When it come available, you will notice here, isn't?
>>
>
> yes I will notice, and jsc (being our release manager) will advice how he
> wants translations so they can be integrated.
I would simply expect that we either use Pootle directly or work on po
files off-line. Returned po files are updated on Pootle to reflect the
final state and finally picked from Pootle, converted to sdf and integrated.
We should create issue, one for each language. But I can't access the
bugzilla at the moment.
Juergen
>
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Antón Méixome
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
>>>> Galician community LibO & AOO
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
>> Galician community LibO & AOO
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 6 May 2013 20:46, Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net> wrote:
> 2013/5/6 janI <ja...@apache.org>
>
> > On 6 May 2013 18:16, Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net> wrote:
> >
> > > 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > On 5/6/13 5:49 PM, Anton Meixome wrote:
> > > > > 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > >> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > > > >>> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > > > >>>> Further languages will be merged as well.
> > > > >>>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I
> > would
> > > > >>>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it
> > > > already,
> > > > >>>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are
> > (besides
> > > > >>> the ones I already see at
> > http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
> > > ):
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> - Lithuanian (lt)
> > > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
> > > > >>> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
> > > > >>> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a
> very
> > > low
> > > > > Pootle's performance.
> > > > >
> > > > > Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time
> until
> > > the
> > > > > next string is accesible.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can somebody check this?
> > > >
> > > > I recommend to wait some further days, we are working on an update of
> > > > the pootle server.
> > > > I mainly setup the new projects to be able to produce po files for
> > > > people who prefer to work offline.
> > > >
> > > > Juergen
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ah, ok Juergen. An update will be a great notice.
> > >
> >
> > The server has been dumping databases for the last 3 days, and actually
> you
> > are lucky just to a "long time" most times I get timeout.
> >
> > The online database has been moved to the new server (status sunday), and
> > all changes after that point will not be automatically moved. Especially
> > because we have a database error making it practically impossible to dump
> > the translations to disk.
> >
> > rgds
> > jan I.
> >
>
> Ok, Jani,
>
> Thanx for the advise. I will lost a few working hours, but I don't worry
> about.
> Now I'm working off-line for some files with many changes.
>
> When it come available, you will notice here, isn't?
>
yes I will notice, and jsc (being our release manager) will advice how he
wants translations so they can be integrated.
rgds
Jan I.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Antón Méixome
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
> > > Galician community LibO & AOO
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
> Galician community LibO & AOO
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net>.
2013/5/6 janI <ja...@apache.org>
> On 6 May 2013 18:16, Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net> wrote:
>
> > 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >
> > > On 5/6/13 5:49 PM, Anton Meixome wrote:
> > > > 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > >> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > > >>> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > > >>>> Further languages will be merged as well.
> > > >>>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I
> would
> > > >>>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it
> > > already,
> > > >>>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are
> (besides
> > > >>> the ones I already see at
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
> > ):
> > > >>>
> > > >>> - Lithuanian (lt)
> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
> > > >>> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
> > > >>> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a very
> > low
> > > > Pootle's performance.
> > > >
> > > > Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time until
> > the
> > > > next string is accesible.
> > > >
> > > > Can somebody check this?
> > >
> > > I recommend to wait some further days, we are working on an update of
> > > the pootle server.
> > > I mainly setup the new projects to be able to produce po files for
> > > people who prefer to work offline.
> > >
> > > Juergen
> > >
> >
> >
> > Ah, ok Juergen. An update will be a great notice.
> >
>
> The server has been dumping databases for the last 3 days, and actually you
> are lucky just to a "long time" most times I get timeout.
>
> The online database has been moved to the new server (status sunday), and
> all changes after that point will not be automatically moved. Especially
> because we have a database error making it practically impossible to dump
> the translations to disk.
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
Ok, Jani,
Thanx for the advise. I will lost a few working hours, but I don't worry
about.
Now I'm working off-line for some files with many changes.
When it come available, you will notice here, isn't?
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Antón Méixome
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
> > Galician community LibO & AOO
> >
>
--
Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
Galician community LibO & AOO
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 6 May 2013 18:16, Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net> wrote:
> 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>
> > On 5/6/13 5:49 PM, Anton Meixome wrote:
> > > 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > >> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > >>> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > >>>> Further languages will be merged as well.
> > >>>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> > >>>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it
> > already,
> > >>>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
> > >>>
> > >>> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
> > >>> the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
> ):
> > >>>
> > >>> - Lithuanian (lt)
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
> > >>> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
> > >>> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
> > >>>
> > >>> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a very
> low
> > > Pootle's performance.
> > >
> > > Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time until
> the
> > > next string is accesible.
> > >
> > > Can somebody check this?
> >
> > I recommend to wait some further days, we are working on an update of
> > the pootle server.
> > I mainly setup the new projects to be able to produce po files for
> > people who prefer to work offline.
> >
> > Juergen
> >
>
>
> Ah, ok Juergen. An update will be a great notice.
>
The server has been dumping databases for the last 3 days, and actually you
are lucky just to a "long time" most times I get timeout.
The online database has been moved to the new server (status sunday), and
all changes after that point will not be automatically moved. Especially
because we have a database error making it practically impossible to dump
the translations to disk.
rgds
jan I.
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Antón Méixome
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
> Galician community LibO & AOO
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net>.
2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> On 5/6/13 5:49 PM, Anton Meixome wrote:
> > 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> >>> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>>> Further languages will be merged as well.
> >>>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> >>>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it
> already,
> >>>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
> >>>
> >>> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
> >>> the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/):
> >>>
> >>> - Lithuanian (lt) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
> >>> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
> >>> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
> >>>
> >>> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a very low
> > Pootle's performance.
> >
> > Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time until the
> > next string is accesible.
> >
> > Can somebody check this?
>
> I recommend to wait some further days, we are working on an update of
> the pootle server.
> I mainly setup the new projects to be able to produce po files for
> people who prefer to work offline.
>
> Juergen
>
Ah, ok Juergen. An update will be a great notice.
>
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Antón Méixome
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
Antón Méixome - Galician Native Lang Coordination
Galician community LibO & AOO
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 5/6/13 5:49 PM, Anton Meixome wrote:
> 2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>
>> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Further languages will be merged as well.
>>>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>>>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>>>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>>>
>>> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
>>> the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/ ):
>>>
>>> - Lithuanian (lt) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
>>> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
>>> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
>>>
>>> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
>>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a very low
> Pootle's performance.
>
> Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time until the
> next string is accesible.
>
> Can somebody check this?
I recommend to wait some further days, we are working on an update of
the pootle server.
I mainly setup the new projects to be able to produce po files for
people who prefer to work offline.
Juergen
>
> Regards,
>
> Antón Méixome
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Anton Meixome <me...@certima.net>.
2013/5/6 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> Further languages will be merged as well.
> >> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> >> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> >> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
> >
> > Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
> > the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/ ):
> >
> > - Lithuanian (lt) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
> > - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
> > - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
> >
> > So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
>
Hi,
I'm translating galician in pootle. Actually I'm experiencing a very low
Pootle's performance.
Each time you push "send" button ... have to await a long time until the
next string is accesible.
Can somebody check this?
Regards,
Antón Méixome
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 5/5/13 10:21 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Further languages will be merged as well.
>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>
> Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
> the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/ ):
>
> - Lithuanian (lt) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
> - Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
> - Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
>
> So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
ok, I will take them into account as well with the update
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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Further languages will be merged as well.
> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/ ):
- Lithuanian (lt) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
- Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
- Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Serg Bormant <bo...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Russian (ru) translation for Apache OpenOffice 4.x UI published at
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/aoo40_ui_ru_po-files.zip
placed in issue 122284
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122284
Current state (r513) and future updates will be available in svn
repository on sf.net:
https://svn.code.sf.net/p/oooru/code/aoru/trunk/
--
wbr, sb
2013/4/25 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>:
> On 4/24/13 4:29 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>
>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>>
>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>>> start with the work.
>>>
>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>>> Pootle server.
>>>
>>
>> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
>> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>
> the first chunk of po files are ready for offline translation
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
>
> I uploaded also the aoo40_en-US.sdf file. And I divided the po files in
> 2 packages, one for ui and one for help.
>
> The next langs will be Greek, Turkish, Portuguese, Hebrew
>
> Juergen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/13 11:40 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/24/13 4:29 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>
>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>>
>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>>> start with the work.
>>>
>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>>> Pootle server.
>>>
>>
>> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
>> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>
> the first chunk of po files are ready for offline translation
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
>
> I uploaded also the aoo40_en-US.sdf file. And I divided the po files in
> 2 packages, one for ui and one for help.
>
> The next langs will be Greek, Turkish, Portuguese, Hebrew
the next set of po files is available: Greek, Turkish, Portuguese,
Hebrew, Catalan
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/13 11:40 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/24/13 4:29 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>
>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>>
>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>>> start with the work.
>>>
>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>>> Pootle server.
>>>
>>
>> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
>> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>
> the first chunk of po files are ready for offline translation
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
>
> I uploaded also the aoo40_en-US.sdf file. And I divided the po files in
> 2 packages, one for ui and one for help.
>
> The next langs will be Greek, Turkish, Portuguese, Hebrew
the next set of po files is available: Greek, Turkish, Portuguese,
Hebrew, Catalan
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/13 4:29 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>> immediately.
>>
>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>
>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>
>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>> start with the work.
>>
>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>> Pootle server.
>>
>
> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
the first chunk of po files are ready for offline translation
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
I uploaded also the aoo40_en-US.sdf file. And I divided the po files in
2 packages, one for ui and one for help.
The next langs will be Greek, Turkish, Portuguese, Hebrew
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 24/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Further languages will be merged as well.
> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
Translations where we had volunteers expressing interest are (besides
the ones I already see at http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/ ):
- Lithuanian (lt) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121877
- Thai (th) https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121851
- Tamil (ta) (on l10n list)
So these should come next if there is a need to prioritize.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Michael Bauer <fi...@akerbeltz.org>.
Thank you very much!
Michael
30/04/2013 22:22, sgrìobh Andrea Pescetti:
>
>> Also, while we're on it, we bundle the spellchecker with AOO for Gaelic,
>> there's a new version, could you please commit that too? The oxt is
>> here:
>> http://www.akerbeltz.org/sealach/hunspell-gd-2.6.oxt
>> (it's also on the extensions site but the link might be quicker for you)
>
> ...but I've just done this. I used the version from the extensions
> site, for consistency. Here's the relevant commit:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1477836
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 30/04/2013 Michael Bauer wrote:
> Thanks, done. I've zipped them and put them on
> http://www.akerbeltz.org/sealach/ui-gd-GB.zip
> Can you commit them please?
I did not do this (and I think Juergen will take care of it)...
> Also, while we're on it, we bundle the spellchecker with AOO for Gaelic,
> there's a new version, could you please commit that too? The oxt is here:
> http://www.akerbeltz.org/sealach/hunspell-gd-2.6.oxt
> (it's also on the extensions site but the link might be quicker for you)
...but I've just done this. I used the version from the extensions site,
for consistency. Here's the relevant commit:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1477836
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Michael Bauer <fi...@akerbeltz.org>.
Thanks, done. I've zipped them and put them on
http://www.akerbeltz.org/sealach/ui-gd-GB.zip
Can you commit them please?
Also, while we're on it, we bundle the spellchecker with AOO for Gaelic,
there's a new version, could you please commit that too? The oxt is here:
http://www.akerbeltz.org/sealach/hunspell-gd-2.6.oxt
(it's also on the extensions site but the link might be quicker for you)
Thanks!
Michael
29/04/2013 19:19, sgrìobh Jürgen Schmidt:
> yes you can start to work offline. We will potentially make one further
> update but that will be not huge.
>
> You can find the files under
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/aoo40_ui_gd_po-files.zip
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/aoo40_help_gd_po-files.zip
>
> I will create issues for all these languages that we can better track
> the progress
>
> Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/28/13 11:57 AM, Michael Bauer wrote:
> So I can just grab the gd files and work offline now? Where are they again?
yes you can start to work offline. We will potentially make one further
update but that will be not huge.
You can find the files under
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/aoo40_ui_gd_po-files.zip
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/aoo40_help_gd_po-files.zip
I will create issues for all these languages that we can better track
the progress
Juergen
>
> Michael
>
>> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
>> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Michael Bauer <fi...@akerbeltz.org>.
So I can just grab the gd files and work offline now? Where are they again?
Michael
> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Paolo Pozzan <pa...@apache.org>.
Il 27/04/2013 18:44, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto:
> On 4/27/13 9:41 AM, Paolo Pozzan wrote:
>> Hi Juergen and thanks for your work.
>> Reply below.
>>
>> Il 24/04/2013 16:29, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto:
>>> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>>>> immediately.
>>>>
>>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>>
>>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>
>> I am quite comfortable with this kind of tools. What kind of help do you
>> need? Can you be more specific?
>
> I am not quite sure, I would like to know for example how I can create a
> translation memory based on 3.4.1 and to benefit from this with the
> moved strings in 4.0
- First of all you need all the po files from 3.4.1. There used to be
the possibility to download a zip file of a single project from pootle.
This seems not possible anymore but it's essential to have it.
- Then with msgcat you can concatenate all the files in one single big
po file with all the translations.
- By using po2tmx [1] (a tool of the translate toolkit) you convert that
big po file in a translation memory with unique segments.
- You can use that tmx file in your favourite CAT tool (like Virtaal or
Lokalize) which will tell you about the percentage of match. There is
surely the possibility to implement this in pootle, but I have never
seen the pootle backend. With some tools you can also translate
automatically the 100% matches.
Hope this helps. Let me know if you need more informations.
Paolo
[1]
http://docs.translatehouse.org/projects/translate-toolkit/en/latest/commands/po2tmx.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/27/13 9:41 AM, Paolo Pozzan wrote:
> Hi Juergen and thanks for your work.
> Reply below.
>
> Il 24/04/2013 16:29, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto:
>> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>
>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>
> I am quite comfortable with this kind of tools. What kind of help do you
> need? Can you be more specific?
I am not quite sure, I would like to know for example how I can create a
translation memory based on 3.4.1 and to benefit from this with the
moved strings in 4.0
>
>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>>> start with the work.
>>>
>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>>> Pootle server.
>>>
>>
>> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
>> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
>> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
>> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
>> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
>
> Does this means that we can start working on it or should we wait some
> other days for new pootle server?
> I would also like to know if this is the final version of translation
> files for 4.0 or if there will be other updates to the files you made
> available. To have a roadmap will be great. Sorry if this was mentioned
> before, I don't follow every discussion on this ML but this subjet
> catched my eyes :-)
you can start with the the translation now when you work offline. We are
still planning to migrate to the new Pootle server.
Juergen
>
> Paolo
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Paolo Pozzan <pa...@apache.org>.
Hi Juergen and thanks for your work.
Reply below.
Il 24/04/2013 16:29, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto:
> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>> immediately.
>>
>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>
>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
I am quite comfortable with this kind of tools. What kind of help do you
need? Can you be more specific?
>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>> start with the work.
>>
>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>> Pootle server.
>>
>
> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
Does this means that we can start working on it or should we wait some
other days for new pootle server?
I would also like to know if this is the final version of translation
files for 4.0 or if there will be other updates to the files you made
available. To have a roadmap will be great. Sorry if this was mentioned
before, I don't follow every discussion on this ML but this subjet
catched my eyes :-)
Paolo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/13 4:29 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>> immediately.
>>
>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>
>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>
>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>> start with the work.
>>
>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>> Pootle server.
>>
>
> the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
> provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
> Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
> like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
> like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
the first chunk of po files are ready for offline translation
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/translation/
I uploaded also the aoo40_en-US.sdf file. And I divided the po files in
2 packages, one for ui and one for help.
The next langs will be Greek, Turkish, Portuguese, Hebrew
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> immediately.
>
> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> impression of how much work we have to do.
>
> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>
> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> start with the work.
>
> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> Pootle server.
>
the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:50:24PM +0200, janI wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> > > On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on
> > >> the languages that we have already released. All other langs will
> > >> follow immediately.
> > >>
> > >> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get
> > >> an impression of how much work we have to do.
> > >>
> > > What is the status of sidebar online help ?
> >
> > no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most
> > intuitive format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will
> > try to figure out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can
> > use it.
> >
> I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online
> help, who ever makes it.
Empty help IDs in ToolBox items can be fixed by replacing them with UNO
commands, something that could be an easy task for a beginner, as it
doesn't require a deep knowledge of the source code.
Proof of concept (only for the text properties panel):
http://people.apache.org/~arielch/images/sidebar/sidebar_helpid_commands.patch
Extended tip for Bold command, before:
http://people.apache.org/~arielch/images/sidebar/sidebar_helpids.png
after:
http://people.apache.org/~arielch/images/sidebar/sidebar_helpbyunocmds.png
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 25/04/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> But in general if such a new shining and visible feature like the
> sidebar is not intuitive to use we have already made the first mistake
> and that will no available online help change ;-)
While this is a (half) joke, this is actually true.
Many concepts in the OpenOffice help are not explained: e.g., the help
does not define "bold", or "italic"; it just gives instructions on how
to make text bold or italic. And the same holds for UI elements. I would
expect the sidebar to be "self-explanatory" in the same way: we don't
need to explain what the sidebar is and how it is arranged, but just
what the individual buttons it contains do.
So I believe it's correct to track the missing Help integration as done in
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122175
but I don't see it as a bug that would prevent releasing 4.0: the right
place for describing the sidebar and its components is the wiki/book
documentation, where we can include better screenshots too.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Guys,
http://openoffice.apache.org/list-conduct.html
And if you are posting so many times in a single thread then I wonder if the purpose is immolation or what? The oxygen is certainly sucked out of what is an important decision - the community decision about releasing and when.
We should go with what we have when we are ready and certain things as in ANY software release - corporate, commercial, or whatever - will need to go to the backlog.
Tomorrow is another day and there will always be another thread.
Thanks JanI - your many efforts and enthusiasm are appreciated, but when times are brittle take a break. I've there myself on many occasions.
Thanks Rob your position is well moderated and intelligent, no need to have the last word. Sometimes it is good to let others articulate your position for you.
Peace and enjoy your weekends!
Best Regards,
Dave
On Apr 26, 2013, at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:39 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 26 April 2013 20:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:10 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>>>>>>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if
>>> released
>>>>>>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>>>>>>> situations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>>>>> we,
>>>>>> as a incomplete or immature development.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>>>>>> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>>>>> solid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>>>>> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
>>>> development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
>>>> change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
>>>> development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
>>>> release just to please the administrative overhead.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, we just completed a test pass of the Sidebar, a "new
>>> feature", and 65 new defects reports are in BZ. We use Bugzilla for
>>> tracking these things, even for new features. Once the developers
>>> have integrated the code into the trunk, posted a build and asked for
>>> testing to begin, then we use BZ for tracking issues.
>>>
>>>> making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
>>>> problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
>>>> sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
>>>> 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
>>>> harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
>>>> f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
>>>> the development/initial test phase.
>>>>
>>>
>>> genLang isn't checked into the trunk, a build posted and a call for
>>> testing started, right? See the difference?
>>>
>>>
>>>> making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an
>>> administrativ
>>>> trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
>>>> challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from
>>> all
>>>> the other open issues with sidebar.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don''t see why you are separating this issue from all the other
>>> sidebar issues, which are, as I indicate, in BZ already.
>>>
>>>> We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>>>>
>>>
>>> And one way you can help is to enter issues with integrated features
>>> into Bugzilla. Though obviously you are just refusing, for
>>> stubbornness sake to do this. At this point I'm pretty sure if I
>>> suggested you should drink water you would rather go thirsty than do
>>> something that I suggested. So be it...
>>>
>>
>> may I politely suggest we keep a moderate tone on this list...I hope I did
>> not write anything personal against anybody !
>>
>> I you want to be personal, it should be kept off-list....but I surdenly
>> understand when I am unwanted. I will take proper action.
>>
>
> Jan, I intended no personal attack. I'm just making the observation
> that IMHO (and I'm entitled to opinions as well, yes?) the discussion
> is going nowhere, that to me it appears that you are entrenched in
> your views, and that I believe the easiest way to move this ahead is
> for me to just enter your issue into BZ myself, which I have now done:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122175
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> rgds.
>> Jan I.
>>
>>>
>>>> Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
>>>> documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
>>>> out are not positive for the process or for our community.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree that discussing it is silly. You should just enter the issue
>>> and BZ and stop talking about it.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
>>>> moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel
>>> issues.
>>>> I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
>>>> something negative.
>>>>
>>>> Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
>>>> stoppers, any objections to that ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Focus
>>>
>>>> rgds
>>>> Jan I.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>
>>>>>> My 2 ¢
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Claudio
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:39 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 26 April 2013 20:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:10 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> > Hi
>> >> >
>> >> > Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>> >> >
>> >> >> >for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>> >> >> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if
>> released
>> >> >> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>> >> >> situations.
>> >> >
>> >> > Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>> >> we,
>> >> > as a incomplete or immature development.
>> >> >
>> >> > Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>> >> > deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>> >> solid.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>> >> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>> >>
>> >
>> > I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
>> > development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
>> > change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
>> > development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
>> > release just to please the administrative overhead.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Actually, we just completed a test pass of the Sidebar, a "new
>> feature", and 65 new defects reports are in BZ. We use Bugzilla for
>> tracking these things, even for new features. Once the developers
>> have integrated the code into the trunk, posted a build and asked for
>> testing to begin, then we use BZ for tracking issues.
>>
>> > making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
>> > problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
>> > sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
>> > 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
>> > harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
>> > f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
>> > the development/initial test phase.
>> >
>>
>> genLang isn't checked into the trunk, a build posted and a call for
>> testing started, right? See the difference?
>>
>>
>> > making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an
>> administrativ
>> > trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
>> > challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from
>> all
>> > the other open issues with sidebar.
>> >
>>
>> I don''t see why you are separating this issue from all the other
>> sidebar issues, which are, as I indicate, in BZ already.
>>
>> > We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>> >
>>
>> And one way you can help is to enter issues with integrated features
>> into Bugzilla. Though obviously you are just refusing, for
>> stubbornness sake to do this. At this point I'm pretty sure if I
>> suggested you should drink water you would rather go thirsty than do
>> something that I suggested. So be it...
>>
>
> may I politely suggest we keep a moderate tone on this list...I hope I did
> not write anything personal against anybody !
>
> I you want to be personal, it should be kept off-list....but I surdenly
> understand when I am unwanted. I will take proper action.
>
Jan, I intended no personal attack. I'm just making the observation
that IMHO (and I'm entitled to opinions as well, yes?) the discussion
is going nowhere, that to me it appears that you are entrenched in
your views, and that I believe the easiest way to move this ahead is
for me to just enter your issue into BZ myself, which I have now done:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122175
-Rob
> rgds.
> Jan I.
>
>>
>> > Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
>> > documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
>> > out are not positive for the process or for our community.
>> >
>>
>> I agree that discussing it is silly. You should just enter the issue
>> and BZ and stop talking about it.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> > This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
>> > moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel
>> issues.
>> > I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
>> > something negative.
>> >
>> > Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
>> > stoppers, any objections to that ?
>> >
>>
>> Focus
>>
>> > rgds
>> > Jan I.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> -Rob
>> >>
>> >> > My 2 ¢
>> >> >
>> >> > Claudio
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 26 April 2013 20:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:10 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi
> >> >
> >> > Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
> >> >
> >> >> >for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
> >> >> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if
> released
> >> >> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
> >> >> situations.
> >> >
> >> > Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
> >> we,
> >> > as a incomplete or immature development.
> >> >
> >> > Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
> >> > deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
> >> solid.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
> >> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
> >>
> >
> > I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
> > development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
> > change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
> > development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
> > release just to please the administrative overhead.
> >
>
>
> Actually, we just completed a test pass of the Sidebar, a "new
> feature", and 65 new defects reports are in BZ. We use Bugzilla for
> tracking these things, even for new features. Once the developers
> have integrated the code into the trunk, posted a build and asked for
> testing to begin, then we use BZ for tracking issues.
>
> > making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
> > problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
> > sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
> > 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
> > harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
> > f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
> > the development/initial test phase.
> >
>
> genLang isn't checked into the trunk, a build posted and a call for
> testing started, right? See the difference?
>
>
> > making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an
> administrativ
> > trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
> > challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from
> all
> > the other open issues with sidebar.
> >
>
> I don''t see why you are separating this issue from all the other
> sidebar issues, which are, as I indicate, in BZ already.
>
> > We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
> >
>
> And one way you can help is to enter issues with integrated features
> into Bugzilla. Though obviously you are just refusing, for
> stubbornness sake to do this. At this point I'm pretty sure if I
> suggested you should drink water you would rather go thirsty than do
> something that I suggested. So be it...
>
may I politely suggest we keep a moderate tone on this list...I hope I did
not write anything personal against anybody !
I you want to be personal, it should be kept off-list....but I surdenly
understand when I am unwanted. I will take proper action.
rgds.
Jan I.
>
> > Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
> > documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
> > out are not positive for the process or for our community.
> >
>
> I agree that discussing it is silly. You should just enter the issue
> and BZ and stop talking about it.
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
> > moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel
> issues.
> > I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
> > something negative.
> >
> > Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
> > stoppers, any objections to that ?
> >
>
> Focus
>
> > rgds
> > Jan I.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > My 2 ¢
> >> >
> >> > Claudio
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:10 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>> >
>> >> >for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>> >> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
>> >> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>> >> situations.
>> >
>> > Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>> we,
>> > as a incomplete or immature development.
>> >
>> > Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>> > deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>> solid.
>> >
>>
>> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>>
>
> I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
> development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
> change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
> development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
> release just to please the administrative overhead.
>
Actually, we just completed a test pass of the Sidebar, a "new
feature", and 65 new defects reports are in BZ. We use Bugzilla for
tracking these things, even for new features. Once the developers
have integrated the code into the trunk, posted a build and asked for
testing to begin, then we use BZ for tracking issues.
> making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
> problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
> sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
> 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
> harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
> f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
> the development/initial test phase.
>
genLang isn't checked into the trunk, a build posted and a call for
testing started, right? See the difference?
> making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an administrativ
> trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
> challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from all
> the other open issues with sidebar.
>
I don''t see why you are separating this issue from all the other
sidebar issues, which are, as I indicate, in BZ already.
> We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>
And one way you can help is to enter issues with integrated features
into Bugzilla. Though obviously you are just refusing, for
stubbornness sake to do this. At this point I'm pretty sure if I
suggested you should drink water you would rather go thirsty than do
something that I suggested. So be it...
> Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
> documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
> out are not positive for the process or for our community.
>
I agree that discussing it is silly. You should just enter the issue
and BZ and stop talking about it.
-Rob
> This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
> moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel issues.
> I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
> something negative.
>
> Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
> stoppers, any objections to that ?
>
Focus
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > My 2 ¢
>> >
>> > Claudio
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/26/13 9:36 PM, janI wrote:
> On 26 April 2013 20:41, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/26/13 8:10 PM, janI wrote:
>>> On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>>>>>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if
>> released
>>>>>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>>>>>> situations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>>>> we,
>>>>> as a incomplete or immature development.
>>>>>
>>>>> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>>>>> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>>>> solid.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>>>> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
>>> development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
>>> change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
>>> development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
>>> release just to please the administrative overhead.
>>
>> well I had at least one issue for my 3 layer work and got a second one
>> for a problem that I introduced. I will create more top finish the SDK
>> adoption. An of course I would prefer indeed issues for all many more
>> changes.
>>
>>>
>>> making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
>>> problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
>>> sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
>>> 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
>>> harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
>>> f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
>>> the development/initial test phase.
>> we have indeed many issues now for the sidebar to document the problems.
>> Problems from very trivial to more complex and not easy to solve.
>> Missing help is of course one that should be tracked with an issue. As
>> release manager I will of course not accept it as showstopper if we have
>> no issue. And even then it has to be discussed.
>>
>> We had again a lot of discussion and nobody started to solve the
>> problem. I have at least tried to collect some info about the format and
>> the tooling. And Ariel provided a patch that will help with extended
>> tooltips. But nobody started work on a help file so far.
>>
>> If somebody will veto the release because of a missing help file you can
>> be sure that I will never ever acting as release manager again.
>>
> According to ASF rules a veto cannot be vetoed...release manager needs to
> say go, with min. 3 PMCs.
I know and I meant more that I wouldn't understand if somebody votes -1
for this.
I wood prefer if we can all support a release and can reach common
consensus.
Juergen
>
> In general the vote is a majority vote for releases, so even if e.g. I was
> to vote -1 it would not have a big effect...but stay rested I will not be
> the show stopper.
>
> Unless I read the rules really wrong.
>
> rgds
> Jan I
>
>
>>
>> And yes it would be missing and it should be fixed, we all agree but it
>> is not stopper issue. We have much more serious problems that we have to
>> fix before.
>>
>>>
>>> making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an
>> administrativ
>>> trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
>>> challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from
>> all
>>> the other open issues with sidebar.
>>
>> I really don't see a separation here, it's simply one more issue
>> regarding the sidebar.
>>
>>>
>>> We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>>
>> exactly and I don't see that here
>>
>>>
>>> Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
>>> documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
>>> out are not positive for the process or for our community.
>>>
>>> This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
>>> moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel
>> issues.
>>> I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
>>> something negative.
>>
>> bring your concerns on the table and describe it clearly that we all can
>> understand exactly what you mean. It is better to start the discussion now.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
>>> stoppers, any objections to that ?
>>
>> an issue for this problem is quite normal and the solution is to start
>> working on it. Quite easy from my pint of view.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> Jan I.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>> My 2 ¢
>>>>>
>>>>> Claudio
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 26 April 2013 20:41, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/26/13 8:10 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
> >>>
> >>>>> for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
> >>>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if
> released
> >>>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
> >>>> situations.
> >>>
> >>> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
> >> we,
> >>> as a incomplete or immature development.
> >>>
> >>> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
> >>> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
> >> solid.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
> >> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
> >>
> >
> > I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
> > development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
> > change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
> > development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
> > release just to please the administrative overhead.
>
> well I had at least one issue for my 3 layer work and got a second one
> for a problem that I introduced. I will create more top finish the SDK
> adoption. An of course I would prefer indeed issues for all many more
> changes.
>
> >
> > making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
> > problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
> > sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
> > 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
> > harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
> > f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
> > the development/initial test phase.
> we have indeed many issues now for the sidebar to document the problems.
> Problems from very trivial to more complex and not easy to solve.
> Missing help is of course one that should be tracked with an issue. As
> release manager I will of course not accept it as showstopper if we have
> no issue. And even then it has to be discussed.
>
> We had again a lot of discussion and nobody started to solve the
> problem. I have at least tried to collect some info about the format and
> the tooling. And Ariel provided a patch that will help with extended
> tooltips. But nobody started work on a help file so far.
>
> If somebody will veto the release because of a missing help file you can
> be sure that I will never ever acting as release manager again.
>
According to ASF rules a veto cannot be vetoed...release manager needs to
say go, with min. 3 PMCs.
In general the vote is a majority vote for releases, so even if e.g. I was
to vote -1 it would not have a big effect...but stay rested I will not be
the show stopper.
Unless I read the rules really wrong.
rgds
Jan I
>
> And yes it would be missing and it should be fixed, we all agree but it
> is not stopper issue. We have much more serious problems that we have to
> fix before.
>
> >
> > making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an
> administrativ
> > trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
> > challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from
> all
> > the other open issues with sidebar.
>
> I really don't see a separation here, it's simply one more issue
> regarding the sidebar.
>
> >
> > We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>
> exactly and I don't see that here
>
> >
> > Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
> > documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
> > out are not positive for the process or for our community.
> >
> > This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
> > moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel
> issues.
> > I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
> > something negative.
>
> bring your concerns on the table and describe it clearly that we all can
> understand exactly what you mean. It is better to start the discussion now.
>
>
> >
> > Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
> > stoppers, any objections to that ?
>
> an issue for this problem is quite normal and the solution is to start
> working on it. Quite easy from my pint of view.
>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > rgds
> > Jan I.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >>> My 2 ¢
> >>>
> >>> Claudio
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/26/13 8:10 PM, janI wrote:
>> On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>>>> for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>>>>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
>>>>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>>>>> situations.
>>>>
>>>> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>>> we,
>>>> as a incomplete or immature development.
>>>>
>>>> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>>>> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>>> solid.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>>> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>>>
>>
>> I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
>> development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
>> change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
>> development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
>> release just to please the administrative overhead.
>
> well I had at least one issue for my 3 layer work and got a second one
> for a problem that I introduced. I will create more top finish the SDK
> adoption. An of course I would prefer indeed issues for all many more
> changes.
>
I went ahead and entered a BZ issue for this:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122175
Regards,
-Rob
>>
>> making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
>> problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
>> sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
>> 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
>> harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
>> f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
>> the development/initial test phase.
> we have indeed many issues now for the sidebar to document the problems.
> Problems from very trivial to more complex and not easy to solve.
> Missing help is of course one that should be tracked with an issue. As
> release manager I will of course not accept it as showstopper if we have
> no issue. And even then it has to be discussed.
>
> We had again a lot of discussion and nobody started to solve the
> problem. I have at least tried to collect some info about the format and
> the tooling. And Ariel provided a patch that will help with extended
> tooltips. But nobody started work on a help file so far.
>
> If somebody will veto the release because of a missing help file you can
> be sure that I will never ever acting as release manager again.
>
> And yes it would be missing and it should be fixed, we all agree but it
> is not stopper issue. We have much more serious problems that we have to
> fix before.
>
>>
>> making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an administrativ
>> trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
>> challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from all
>> the other open issues with sidebar.
>
> I really don't see a separation here, it's simply one more issue
> regarding the sidebar.
>
>>
>> We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>
> exactly and I don't see that here
>
>>
>> Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
>> documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
>> out are not positive for the process or for our community.
>>
>> This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
>> moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel issues.
>> I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
>> something negative.
>
> bring your concerns on the table and describe it clearly that we all can
> understand exactly what you mean. It is better to start the discussion now.
>
>
>>
>> Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
>> stoppers, any objections to that ?
>
> an issue for this problem is quite normal and the solution is to start
> working on it. Quite easy from my pint of view.
>
> Juergen
>
>>
>> rgds
>> Jan I.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>> My 2 ¢
>>>>
>>>> Claudio
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/26/13 8:10 PM, janI wrote:
> On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>>>
>>>>> for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>>>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
>>>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>>>> situations.
>>>
>>> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>> we,
>>> as a incomplete or immature development.
>>>
>>> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>>> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>> solid.
>>>
>>
>> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>>
>
> I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
> development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
> change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
> development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
> release just to please the administrative overhead.
well I had at least one issue for my 3 layer work and got a second one
for a problem that I introduced. I will create more top finish the SDK
adoption. An of course I would prefer indeed issues for all many more
changes.
>
> making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
> problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
> sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
> 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
> harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
> f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
> the development/initial test phase.
we have indeed many issues now for the sidebar to document the problems.
Problems from very trivial to more complex and not easy to solve.
Missing help is of course one that should be tracked with an issue. As
release manager I will of course not accept it as showstopper if we have
no issue. And even then it has to be discussed.
We had again a lot of discussion and nobody started to solve the
problem. I have at least tried to collect some info about the format and
the tooling. And Ariel provided a patch that will help with extended
tooltips. But nobody started work on a help file so far.
If somebody will veto the release because of a missing help file you can
be sure that I will never ever acting as release manager again.
And yes it would be missing and it should be fixed, we all agree but it
is not stopper issue. We have much more serious problems that we have to
fix before.
>
> making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an administrativ
> trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
> challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from all
> the other open issues with sidebar.
I really don't see a separation here, it's simply one more issue
regarding the sidebar.
>
> We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
exactly and I don't see that here
>
> Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
> documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
> out are not positive for the process or for our community.
>
> This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
> moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel issues.
> I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
> something negative.
bring your concerns on the table and describe it clearly that we all can
understand exactly what you mean. It is better to start the discussion now.
>
> Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
> stoppers, any objections to that ?
an issue for this problem is quite normal and the solution is to start
working on it. Quite easy from my pint of view.
Juergen
>
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> My 2 ¢
>>>
>>> Claudio
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
> >
> >> >for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
> >> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
> >> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
> >> situations.
> >
> > Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
> we,
> > as a incomplete or immature development.
> >
> > Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
> > deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
> solid.
> >
>
> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
> BZ for this. Don't you agree?
>
I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
development, but of course we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
release just to please the administrative overhead.
making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work. I
f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
the development/initial test phase.
making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an administrativ
trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from all
the other open issues with sidebar.
We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
Discussing whether or not help is integrated after both developers and
documenters have told it is not, or whether or not a BZ should be filled
out are not positive for the process or for our community.
This is of course my private meaning, but we have a real tendency at the
moment to discuss the administrative surrounding and not the kernel issues.
I do not understand, why that is, but I strongly believe it signals
something negative.
Lets try to focus on the problems, make solutions...not administrative
stoppers, any objections to that ?
rgds
Jan I.
>
> -Rob
>
> > My 2 ¢
> >
> > Claudio
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
>
>> >for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>> situations.
>
> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against we,
> as a incomplete or immature development.
>
> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are solid.
>
Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
BZ for this. Don't you agree?
-Rob
> My 2 ¢
>
> Claudio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Claudio Filho <fi...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> escreveu:
> >for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
> situations.
Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against we,
as a incomplete or immature development.
Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are solid.
My 2 ¢
Claudio
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 26 April 2013 16:59, Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> You are choosing the wrong examples. Please read above: "any of the
> >> *new* help IDs introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the
> >> help file". Export HELP_DEBUG=1 or read the source code, and you'll
> >
> > No. I'm running like a user would run it.
>
> I doubt every user would be so passive to stop at the default page for
> the respective module, or a complete blank page (like when hitting F1
> in View - Sidebar), because there is no specific help. On the
> contrary, for some reason there is an Index and a Find tab the Online
> Help; type "sidebar" on the Index or search this term: there are no
> keys on the index and no search results.
>
> > It the sky is truly falling, like Jan suggests it is,
>
> I didn't understand this is what Jan is saying.
>
> for the record, this was not what I said....I simply believe that a
feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if released
should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
situations.
rgds
jan I.
> > then it would be evident without
> > enabling debug mode or reading source code.
>
> No, it is self evident by means of what the user has currently
> available: Help Index, Help Search, Tools - Options - OpenOffice -
> General - Extended Tips, Shift+F1, Help - What's This?, etc.
>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> You are choosing the wrong examples. Please read above: "any of the
>> *new* help IDs introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the
>> help file". Export HELP_DEBUG=1 or read the source code, and you'll
>
> No. I'm running like a user would run it.
I doubt every user would be so passive to stop at the default page for
the respective module, or a complete blank page (like when hitting F1
in View - Sidebar), because there is no specific help. On the
contrary, for some reason there is an Index and a Find tab the Online
Help; type "sidebar" on the Index or search this term: there are no
keys on the index and no search results.
> It the sky is truly falling, like Jan suggests it is,
I didn't understand this is what Jan is saying.
> then it would be evident without
> enabling debug mode or reading source code.
No, it is self evident by means of what the user has currently
available: Help Index, Help Search, Tools - Options - OpenOffice -
General - Extended Tips, Shift+F1, Help - What's This?, etc.
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
<ar...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 07:07:15PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In
>> >> fact, please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can
>> >> triage that along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for
>> >> suggesting something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek
>> >> consensus on that designation on the dev list. But I just tried
>> >> AOO 4.0 and when I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online
>> >> help. When I am in a specific panel I get help for the specific
>> >> panel.
>> >
>> > This would be rather surprising, because any of the new help IDs
>> > introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the help files.
>> > You might well be seeing the Online Help, but not with the help page
>> > that belongs to the respective panel, as it does not exist.
>> >
>>
>> I know what I saw, but thanks for questioning it.
>
> Who was questioning? I was simply pointing a fact.
>
>> For example, load Writer, go to side panel, open the "Styles
>> & Formatting" section. Click F1. It launches help directly to the
>> "Styles & Formatting" page. Go to the "Gallery" section of the
>> sidebar. Click F1. It loads help, directly to the Gallery page of
>> the help.
>
> You are choosing the wrong examples. Please read above: "any of the
> *new* help IDs introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the
> help file". Export HELP_DEBUG=1 or read the source code, and you'll
No. I'm running like a user would run it. It the sky is truly
falling, like Jan suggests it is, then it would be evident without
enabling debug mode or reading source code. But when I run as a user
F1 always brings up help, either a specific help page or the default
help page. I don't see a "show stopper" here. I also still don't
see an issue in BZ related to this.
Regards,
-Rob
> understand. I also pointed to this already, in this thread:
> http://markmail.org/message/264qyz2cwdd5brbg (look at the screenshots,
> too).
>
>> This is Windows 7 with r1466899. If you are seeing something else, or
>> a particular context where it is not working (quite possible), then
>> I'd recommend an issue in BZ. Not to violate your human rights or
>> anything like that. But because that is where we report bugs.
>
> Thanks for the information, I already know it (I see my mail several
> times here https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_activity.cgi?id=121420 ;)
> )
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 07:07:15PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In
> >> fact, please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can
> >> triage that along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for
> >> suggesting something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek
> >> consensus on that designation on the dev list. But I just tried
> >> AOO 4.0 and when I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online
> >> help. When I am in a specific panel I get help for the specific
> >> panel.
> >
> > This would be rather surprising, because any of the new help IDs
> > introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the help files.
> > You might well be seeing the Online Help, but not with the help page
> > that belongs to the respective panel, as it does not exist.
> >
>
> I know what I saw, but thanks for questioning it.
Who was questioning? I was simply pointing a fact.
> For example, load Writer, go to side panel, open the "Styles
> & Formatting" section. Click F1. It launches help directly to the
> "Styles & Formatting" page. Go to the "Gallery" section of the
> sidebar. Click F1. It loads help, directly to the Gallery page of
> the help.
You are choosing the wrong examples. Please read above: "any of the
*new* help IDs introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the
help file". Export HELP_DEBUG=1 or read the source code, and you'll
understand. I also pointed to this already, in this thread:
http://markmail.org/message/264qyz2cwdd5brbg (look at the screenshots,
too).
> This is Windows 7 with r1466899. If you are seeing something else, or
> a particular context where it is not working (quite possible), then
> I'd recommend an issue in BZ. Not to violate your human rights or
> anything like that. But because that is where we report bugs.
Thanks for the information, I already know it (I see my mail several
times here https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_activity.cgi?id=121420 ;)
)
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 26 April 2013 00:39, Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 03:22:33PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
> > please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
> > along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
> > something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
> > that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
> > I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
> > specific panel I get help for the specific panel.
>
> This would be rather surprising, because any of the new help IDs
> introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the help files. You
> might well be seeing the Online Help, but not with the help page that
> belongs to the respective panel, as it does not exist.
>
@ariel, thx for clarifying it.
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
> <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 03:22:33PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
>>> please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
>>> along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
>>> something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
>>> that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
>>> I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
>>> specific panel I get help for the specific panel.
>>
>> This would be rather surprising, because any of the new help IDs
>> introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the help files. You
>> might well be seeing the Online Help, but not with the help page that
>> belongs to the respective panel, as it does not exist.
>>
>
> I know what I saw, but thanks for questioning it. For example, load
> Writer, go to side panel, open the "Styles & Formatting" section.
> Click F1. It launches help directly to the "Styles & Formatting"
> page. Go to the "Gallery" section of the sidebar. Click F1. It
> loads help, directly to the Gallery page of the help.
>
> This is Windows 7 with r1466899. If you are seeing something else, or
> a particular context where it is not working (quite possible), then
> I'd recommend an issue in BZ. Not to violate your human rights or
> anything like that. But because that is where we report bugs.
>
And I don't even know what context you could possibly use on the main
character and paragraph styles panel. The current selection in those
cases is going to almost always be the text in the document, not on a
control in the sidebar. So what else could we do better than the main
help page? Where would you get a help context from?
Guidelines for MS Windows would also suggest a Shift-F1 help mode
where your cursor changes to a special help cursor and then you can
click on individual controls to get help. That might be a
possibility, but my impression was that very few users are aware of
that help mode.
-Rob
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>>
>> Regards
>> --
>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>> La Plata, Argentina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
<ar...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 03:22:33PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
>> please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
>> along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
>> something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
>> that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
>> I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
>> specific panel I get help for the specific panel.
>
> This would be rather surprising, because any of the new help IDs
> introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the help files. You
> might well be seeing the Online Help, but not with the help page that
> belongs to the respective panel, as it does not exist.
>
I know what I saw, but thanks for questioning it. For example, load
Writer, go to side panel, open the "Styles & Formatting" section.
Click F1. It launches help directly to the "Styles & Formatting"
page. Go to the "Gallery" section of the sidebar. Click F1. It
loads help, directly to the Gallery page of the help.
This is Windows 7 with r1466899. If you are seeing something else, or
a particular context where it is not working (quite possible), then
I'd recommend an issue in BZ. Not to violate your human rights or
anything like that. But because that is where we report bugs.
Regards,
-Rob
>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 03:22:33PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
> please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
> along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
> something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
> that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
> I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
> specific panel I get help for the specific panel.
This would be rather surprising, because any of the new help IDs
introduced by the sidebar are referenced in any of the help files. You
might well be seeing the Online Help, but not with the help page that
belongs to the respective panel, as it does not exist.
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
(top posting) The discussion drifted apart from the original issue...
Regarding documentation on the sidebar there is something to say, but
please, consider the following just as an analysis of the actual situation,
no complains from my part.
The documentation team have a non small problem. Right now there are
several good editors, but only one active writer: me. That's an unfortunate
situation for a number of reasons. First of all I'm not a native English
speaker so editors have more work. Also, I cannot write the whole guide by
myself: base is far from my experience, I only seldom use Calc and I do not
like presentation with transitions (always use static pdfs...). But more
important to this topic is that I'm not able to understand how the online
help system works. So the sad true is that nobody is working on the bundled
help and unless someone takes the lead with a clear proposal nobody will
work on it on the near future.
Regards
Ricardo
2013/4/25 janI <ja...@apache.org>
> On 25 April 2013 19:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > > <snip snip snip>
> > >
> > >>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a
> > selfmade
> > >>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair
> of
> > >>>>> me
> > >>>>
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> stand in the way.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence
> to
> > >>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the
> future.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3
> > or
> > >>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we
> fix
> > >>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not
> for a
> > >>>
> > >>> major release.
> > >>>
> > >>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will
> > silence
> > >>> myself. You
> > >>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so
> according
> > >>> the
> > >>> apache way,
> > >>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is
> > acceptable.
> > >>
> > >> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else
> steps
> > >> in ;-)
> > >>
> > >> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
> > >> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
> > >> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I
> believe
> > >> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
> > >> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project
> and
> > >> in the product. It's not easy ...
> > >>
> > >> Juergen
> > >>
> > > Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making here?
> > On
> > > one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen which
> trim
> > > features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release. On
> > the
> > > other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to
> whether
> > > there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e.
> > pushing
> > > back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a
> solid
> > > understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision as a
> > > project?"
> > >
> > > To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO 4.0
> > > which are currently in jeopardy:
> > >
> > > * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has a
> > > major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
> > > and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
> >
> This is important to me.
>
> > > * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use the
> > > po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
> >
> to me this is nice to have, but does not afftect end-users.
>
> > > and the new pootle server infrastructure.
> >
> Is ready in approx. 1 week.
>
> > > * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
> > > question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
> > > timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
> > > screens + color schemes + ??)
> >
> This is to a must for 4.0, we cannot change brand with 4.01
>
> > >
> > >
> > > I see a few directions that this could go:
> > >
> > > 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
> > > originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
> > > 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
> > > completely
> > >
> >
> > We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months
> from
> > now.
> >
> > 3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
> > >
> > >
> > > I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
> >
> > Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
> > almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
> > 3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
> > added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
> > we're withholding from users at the same time.
> >
> Are we really withholding any major features...when I compare the codebases
> I cannot really see it, but I might be wrong.
>
>
> >
> > One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
> > that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
> > likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this back?
> > We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
> > more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
> > preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
> >
> This is a maintenence release, which could have been done in 3.4.1, and
> still can be done as 3.4.2.
>
> Please remember 4.0 is a major release.
>
> >
> > IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
> > wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
> > plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
> >
> > I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
> > ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
> > was not ready.
> >
> That work is first of all only in the very beginning (see mails from jürgen
> regarding po files), and it is not lost in any way.
>
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
> >
> >
> > > Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of
> > our
> > > community that is not fully comfortable with this.
> > >
> > > That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we have
> > > estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need
> to
> > be
> > > complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time frame
> > would
> > > be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with that?
> > >
> > > Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
> > > questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a decision
> > as a
> > > project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
> > >
> >
> > Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
> > something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
> > Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
> > plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
> > languages, even selected new features.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > > A
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:50 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 25 April 2013 21:22, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
<snip>
>>
>> And you seem to be suggesting delaying the release because of a
>> documentation issue ?! But again, this is code that someone wrote
>> versus work that is not actually happening. I don't think we delay
>> the real stuff because you wish that someone else was doing something
>> that isn't being done.
>>
>
> I see your point, and maybe I was all wrong about this...I just thought we
> wanted to deliver a prof. product.
>
It is a safe assumption that we all want to do this. But we may have
differences of opinion on what this means, and we should (IMHO)
discuss these differences without questioning the other party's good
intentions.
>> >
>>
>> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
>> please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
>> along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
>> something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
>> that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
>> I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
>> specific panel I get help for the specific panel. So if there is
>> something huge lacking here, please write it up in BZ so we're all
>> talking about the same thing.
>>
>
> In one mail I am told, it is a new feature nobody works on, and now I read
> it is all in there...
>
That's why I suggested writing up a defect report. I have no idea
what exactly you think is missing. I did some basic testing of the
embedded help and it appears to work. Maybe something is missing? I
don't know. All I know is until you get concrete with your concern
we're just going to go around in circles on this.
>>
>> Again, if you think something is missing in 4.0, enter a defect in BZ on
>> it.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>
> No need to thank me for saying my opinion.
>
> I should really never have raised this issue. Maybe one day our community
> are strong enough to have such discussions without using "killer argument"
> like write a BZ (but it is a quite polite way to silence people).
>
Not at all. Writing a BZ issue is how you show that you have a
concrete issue. It is how we prioritize issues and track them to
resolution. It is a much better approach than reporting things in a
unrelated thread like this one, "Translation for AOO 4.0". No one
should feel insulted or "silenced" by being asked to enter their issue
into an issue tracking system. I don't know if you noticed, but we
just finished the test pass on the sidebar and have 65 new issues
because of this. Unless you get your issue into BZ it is likely to be
forgotten as soon as this thread scrolls from view and missed by
anyone who did not suspect documentation issues to be reported in a
response to a translation thread.
Regards,
-Rob
> I am sorry for having caused fuzz on the list with what I thought was a
> valid concern, lets simply see what 4.0 contains when it is released.
>
> rgds
> jan I
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 25 April 2013 21:22, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:11 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 25 April 2013 21:00, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:25 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > On 25 April 2013 19:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <andrew.rist@oracle.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <
> jogischmidt@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <
> jogischmidt@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> > <snip snip snip>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a
> >> >> selfmade
> >> >> >>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be
> >> fair of
> >> >> >>>>> me
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> to
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> stand in the way.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show
> >> confidence to
> >> >> >>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the
> >> future.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release
> every
> >> 3
> >> >> or
> >> >> >>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where
> we
> >> fix
> >> >> >>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not
> >> for a
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> major release.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will
> >> >> silence
> >> >> >>> myself. You
> >> >> >>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so
> >> according
> >> >> >>> the
> >> >> >>> apache way,
> >> >> >>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is
> >> >> acceptable.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else
> >> steps
> >> >> >> in ;-)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have
> >> 100%
> >> >> >> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into
> account.
> >> >> >> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I
> >> believe
> >> >> >> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
> >> >> >> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the
> project
> >> and
> >> >> >> in the product. It's not easy ...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Juergen
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making
> >> here?
> >> >> On
> >> >> > one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen
> which
> >> trim
> >> >> > features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release.
> On
> >> >> the
> >> >> > other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to
> >> whether
> >> >> > there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e.
> >> >> pushing
> >> >> > back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a
> >> solid
> >> >> > understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision
> as a
> >> >> > project?"
> >> >> >
> >> >> > To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO
> >> 4.0
> >> >> > which are currently in jeopardy:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This
> has
> >> a
> >> >> > major impact on the product, and the ability of large
> corporations
> >> >> > and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
> >> >>
> >> > This is important to me.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Those who are actually doing this work also think it is important.
> >> Otherwise they would not be doing it. But it is not part of the 4.0
> >> plan that we've been executing on.
> >>
> >> >> > * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use
> >> the
> >> >> > po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo
> files,
> >> >>
> >> > to me this is nice to have, but does not afftect end-users.
> >> >
> >> >> > and the new pootle server infrastructure.
> >> >>
> >> > Is ready in approx. 1 week.
> >> >
> >> >> > * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
> >> >> > question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
> >> >> > timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full
> brand/splash
> >> >> > screens + color schemes + ??)
> >> >>
> >> > This is to a must for 4.0, we cannot change brand with 4.01
> >> >
> >>
> >> And that's why we're working on the logo survey now, after collecting
> >> 40 proposals. We'll certainly have a new logo and splash screen for
> >> 4.0. But currently no one at all is working on branding changes
> >> beyond that. at least no work that is on the lists, Items that no
> >> one is working on will not happen not matter how much time we wait.
> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I see a few directions that this could go:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount
> of
> >> >> > originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
> >> >> > 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features
> in
> >> >> > completely
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months
> >> from
> >> >> now.
> >> >>
> >> >> 3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
> >> >>
> >> >> Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
> >> >> almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
> >> >> 3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
> >> >> added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
> >> >> we're withholding from users at the same time.
> >> >>
> >> > Are we really withholding any major features...when I compare the
> >> codebases
> >> > I cannot really see it, but I might be wrong.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes, many, many interop fixes. 100 or so were listed on the blog awhile
> >> ago:
> >>
> >>
> https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/merging_lotus_symphony_allegro_moderato
> >>
> > that is still maintenance items...no big features. a change to 4.0 is not
> > just due to interop fixes.
> >
>
> And you seem to be suggesting delaying the release because of a
> documentation issue ?! But again, this is code that someone wrote
> versus work that is not actually happening. I don't think we delay
> the real stuff because you wish that someone else was doing something
> that isn't being done.
>
I see your point, and maybe I was all wrong about this...I just thought we
wanted to deliver a prof. product.
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
> >> >> that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
> >> >> likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this
> back?
> >> >> We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
> >> >> more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
> >> >> preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
> >> >>
> >> > This is a maintenence release, which could have been done in 3.4.1,
> and
> >> > still can be done as 3.4.2.
> >> >
> >>
> >> We could have done many things in the past. But the plan we agreed on
> >> was to do these things for AOO 4.0.
> >>
> >
> > One of them was the sidebar, and to me that includes documentation and
> > online help.
> >
>
> I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
> please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
> along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
> something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
> that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
> I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
> specific panel I get help for the specific panel. So if there is
> something huge lacking here, please write it up in BZ so we're all
> talking about the same thing.
>
In one mail I am told, it is a new feature nobody works on, and now I read
it is all in there...
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> > Please remember 4.0 is a major release.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Only if we release it. Otherwise it is nothing.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
> >> >> wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
> >> >> plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
> >> >>
> >> >> I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
> >> >> ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
> >> >> was not ready.
> >> >>
> >> > That work is first of all only in the very beginning (see mails from
> >> jürgen
> >> > regarding po files), and it is not lost in any way.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Glad to hear it. When it is ready we'll include it in a release.
> >>
> >> It is reasonable to discuss and balance between these two interests:
> >>
> >> a) Those who have already completed work they committed to doing for
> >> the release.
> >>
> >> and
> >>
> >> b) Those who have not yet completed the work they committed to doing
> >> and are asking for a delay.
> >>
> >> We can have that discussion and work something out.
> >>
> >> On the other hand I give very little weight to:
> >>
> >> c) Those who are not doing work, but only wish that someone else does
> >> work, work not part of the agreed-upon plan, and wish to delay the
> >> release until someone else does the work
> >>
> >> I hope you understand why it is not reasonable to give much weight to
> >> c). The passive voice "X should be done" carries zero weight around
> >> here. The active voice "I want to do X" is much better.
> >>
> >
> > No actually I dont...I hear you say just because I am not capable of
> making
> > online help myself, I cannot have an opinion of whether or not it is
> > important.
> >
>
> Opinions are free. I would not wish to deprive anyone of their opinions.
>
> > I care a lot about the full products, even though I am not capable of
> > developing large parts of it...I assume I could say the same about you
> and
> > at the same time I think both of us have opinions on many aspects of AOO.
> >
> > I think a lot of people have invested lots of time in preparing the 4.0
> > release (I know I have only done little pieces), and it would be a shame
> to
> > release the 4.0 highlight feature amputated.
> >
>
> Again, if you think something is missing in 4.0, enter a defect in BZ on
> it.
>
> Thanks!
>
No need to thank me for saying my opinion.
I should really never have raised this issue. Maybe one day our community
are strong enough to have such discussions without using "killer argument"
like write a BZ (but it is a quite polite way to silence people).
I am sorry for having caused fuzz on the list with what I thought was a
valid concern, lets simply see what 4.0 contains when it is released.
rgds
jan I
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > rgds
> > Jan I.
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > rgds
> >> > Jan I.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some
> portion of
> >> >> our
> >> >> > community that is not fully comfortable with this.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we
> >> have
> >> >> > estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would
> need
> >> to
> >> >> be
> >> >> > complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time
> frame
> >> >> would
> >> >> > be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with
> >> that?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to
> these
> >> >> > questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a
> >> decision
> >> >> as a
> >> >> > project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
> >> >> something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
> >> >> Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
> >> >> plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
> >> >> languages, even selected new features.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> -Rob
> >> >>
> >> >> > A
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:11 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 25 April 2013 21:00, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:25 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > On 25 April 2013 19:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> > <snip snip snip>
>> >> >
>> >> >>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a
>> >> selfmade
>> >> >>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be
>> fair of
>> >> >>>>> me
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> to
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> stand in the way.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show
>> confidence to
>> >> >>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the
>> future.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every
>> 3
>> >> or
>> >> >>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we
>> fix
>> >> >>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not
>> for a
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> major release.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will
>> >> silence
>> >> >>> myself. You
>> >> >>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so
>> according
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> apache way,
>> >> >>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is
>> >> acceptable.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else
>> steps
>> >> >> in ;-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have
>> 100%
>> >> >> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
>> >> >> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I
>> believe
>> >> >> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
>> >> >> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project
>> and
>> >> >> in the product. It's not easy ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Juergen
>> >> >>
>> >> > Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making
>> here?
>> >> On
>> >> > one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen which
>> trim
>> >> > features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release. On
>> >> the
>> >> > other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to
>> whether
>> >> > there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e.
>> >> pushing
>> >> > back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a
>> solid
>> >> > understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision as a
>> >> > project?"
>> >> >
>> >> > To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO
>> 4.0
>> >> > which are currently in jeopardy:
>> >> >
>> >> > * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has
>> a
>> >> > major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
>> >> > and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
>> >>
>> > This is important to me.
>> >
>>
>> Those who are actually doing this work also think it is important.
>> Otherwise they would not be doing it. But it is not part of the 4.0
>> plan that we've been executing on.
>>
>> >> > * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use
>> the
>> >> > po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
>> >>
>> > to me this is nice to have, but does not afftect end-users.
>> >
>> >> > and the new pootle server infrastructure.
>> >>
>> > Is ready in approx. 1 week.
>> >
>> >> > * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
>> >> > question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
>> >> > timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
>> >> > screens + color schemes + ??)
>> >>
>> > This is to a must for 4.0, we cannot change brand with 4.01
>> >
>>
>> And that's why we're working on the logo survey now, after collecting
>> 40 proposals. We'll certainly have a new logo and splash screen for
>> 4.0. But currently no one at all is working on branding changes
>> beyond that. at least no work that is on the lists, Items that no
>> one is working on will not happen not matter how much time we wait.
>>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I see a few directions that this could go:
>> >> >
>> >> > 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
>> >> > originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
>> >> > 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
>> >> > completely
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months
>> from
>> >> now.
>> >>
>> >> 3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
>> >>
>> >> Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
>> >> almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
>> >> 3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
>> >> added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
>> >> we're withholding from users at the same time.
>> >>
>> > Are we really withholding any major features...when I compare the
>> codebases
>> > I cannot really see it, but I might be wrong.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, many, many interop fixes. 100 or so were listed on the blog awhile
>> ago:
>>
>> https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/merging_lotus_symphony_allegro_moderato
>>
> that is still maintenance items...no big features. a change to 4.0 is not
> just due to interop fixes.
>
And you seem to be suggesting delaying the release because of a
documentation issue ?! But again, this is code that someone wrote
versus work that is not actually happening. I don't think we delay
the real stuff because you wish that someone else was doing something
that isn't being done.
>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
>> >> that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
>> >> likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this back?
>> >> We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
>> >> more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
>> >> preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
>> >>
>> > This is a maintenence release, which could have been done in 3.4.1, and
>> > still can be done as 3.4.2.
>> >
>>
>> We could have done many things in the past. But the plan we agreed on
>> was to do these things for AOO 4.0.
>>
>
> One of them was the sidebar, and to me that includes documentation and
> online help.
>
I think you need to be far more specific about your concern. In fact,
please enter a BZ for what you think is lacking. We can triage that
along with the other bugs. There a keyword in BZ for suggesting
something is "stop ship" bug and in the past we seek consensus on
that designation on the dev list. But I just tried AOO 4.0 and when
I hit F1 when in the side panel I get the online help. When I am in a
specific panel I get help for the specific panel. So if there is
something huge lacking here, please write it up in BZ so we're all
talking about the same thing.
>
>>
>> > Please remember 4.0 is a major release.
>> >
>>
>> Only if we release it. Otherwise it is nothing.
>>
>> >>
>> >> IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
>> >> wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
>> >> plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
>> >>
>> >> I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
>> >> ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
>> >> was not ready.
>> >>
>> > That work is first of all only in the very beginning (see mails from
>> jürgen
>> > regarding po files), and it is not lost in any way.
>> >
>>
>> Glad to hear it. When it is ready we'll include it in a release.
>>
>> It is reasonable to discuss and balance between these two interests:
>>
>> a) Those who have already completed work they committed to doing for
>> the release.
>>
>> and
>>
>> b) Those who have not yet completed the work they committed to doing
>> and are asking for a delay.
>>
>> We can have that discussion and work something out.
>>
>> On the other hand I give very little weight to:
>>
>> c) Those who are not doing work, but only wish that someone else does
>> work, work not part of the agreed-upon plan, and wish to delay the
>> release until someone else does the work
>>
>> I hope you understand why it is not reasonable to give much weight to
>> c). The passive voice "X should be done" carries zero weight around
>> here. The active voice "I want to do X" is much better.
>>
>
> No actually I dont...I hear you say just because I am not capable of making
> online help myself, I cannot have an opinion of whether or not it is
> important.
>
Opinions are free. I would not wish to deprive anyone of their opinions.
> I care a lot about the full products, even though I am not capable of
> developing large parts of it...I assume I could say the same about you and
> at the same time I think both of us have opinions on many aspects of AOO.
>
> I think a lot of people have invested lots of time in preparing the 4.0
> release (I know I have only done little pieces), and it would be a shame to
> release the 4.0 highlight feature amputated.
>
Again, if you think something is missing in 4.0, enter a defect in BZ on it.
Thanks!
-Rob
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > rgds
>> > Jan I.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of
>> >> our
>> >> > community that is not fully comfortable with this.
>> >> >
>> >> > That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we
>> have
>> >> > estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need
>> to
>> >> be
>> >> > complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time frame
>> >> would
>> >> > be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with
>> that?
>> >> >
>> >> > Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
>> >> > questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a
>> decision
>> >> as a
>> >> > project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
>> >> something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
>> >> Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
>> >> plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
>> >> languages, even selected new features.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> -Rob
>> >>
>> >> > A
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 25 April 2013 21:00, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:25 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 25 April 2013 19:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com
> >
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> > <snip snip snip>
> >> >
> >> >>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a
> >> selfmade
> >> >>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be
> fair of
> >> >>>>> me
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> to
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> stand in the way.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show
> confidence to
> >> >>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the
> future.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every
> 3
> >> or
> >> >>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we
> fix
> >> >>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not
> for a
> >> >>>
> >> >>> major release.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will
> >> silence
> >> >>> myself. You
> >> >>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so
> according
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> apache way,
> >> >>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is
> >> acceptable.
> >> >>
> >> >> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else
> steps
> >> >> in ;-)
> >> >>
> >> >> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have
> 100%
> >> >> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
> >> >> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I
> believe
> >> >> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
> >> >> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project
> and
> >> >> in the product. It's not easy ...
> >> >>
> >> >> Juergen
> >> >>
> >> > Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making
> here?
> >> On
> >> > one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen which
> trim
> >> > features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release. On
> >> the
> >> > other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to
> whether
> >> > there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e.
> >> pushing
> >> > back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a
> solid
> >> > understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision as a
> >> > project?"
> >> >
> >> > To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO
> 4.0
> >> > which are currently in jeopardy:
> >> >
> >> > * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has
> a
> >> > major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
> >> > and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
> >>
> > This is important to me.
> >
>
> Those who are actually doing this work also think it is important.
> Otherwise they would not be doing it. But it is not part of the 4.0
> plan that we've been executing on.
>
> >> > * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use
> the
> >> > po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
> >>
> > to me this is nice to have, but does not afftect end-users.
> >
> >> > and the new pootle server infrastructure.
> >>
> > Is ready in approx. 1 week.
> >
> >> > * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
> >> > question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
> >> > timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
> >> > screens + color schemes + ??)
> >>
> > This is to a must for 4.0, we cannot change brand with 4.01
> >
>
> And that's why we're working on the logo survey now, after collecting
> 40 proposals. We'll certainly have a new logo and splash screen for
> 4.0. But currently no one at all is working on branding changes
> beyond that. at least no work that is on the lists, Items that no
> one is working on will not happen not matter how much time we wait.
>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I see a few directions that this could go:
> >> >
> >> > 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
> >> > originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
> >> > 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
> >> > completely
> >> >
> >>
> >> We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months
> from
> >> now.
> >>
> >> 3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
> >>
> >> Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
> >> almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
> >> 3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
> >> added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
> >> we're withholding from users at the same time.
> >>
> > Are we really withholding any major features...when I compare the
> codebases
> > I cannot really see it, but I might be wrong.
> >
>
> Yes, many, many interop fixes. 100 or so were listed on the blog awhile
> ago:
>
> https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/merging_lotus_symphony_allegro_moderato
>
that is still maintenance items...no big features. a change to 4.0 is not
just due to interop fixes.
>
> >
> >>
> >> One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
> >> that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
> >> likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this back?
> >> We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
> >> more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
> >> preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
> >>
> > This is a maintenence release, which could have been done in 3.4.1, and
> > still can be done as 3.4.2.
> >
>
> We could have done many things in the past. But the plan we agreed on
> was to do these things for AOO 4.0.
>
One of them was the sidebar, and to me that includes documentation and
online help.
>
> > Please remember 4.0 is a major release.
> >
>
> Only if we release it. Otherwise it is nothing.
>
> >>
> >> IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
> >> wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
> >> plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
> >>
> >> I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
> >> ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
> >> was not ready.
> >>
> > That work is first of all only in the very beginning (see mails from
> jürgen
> > regarding po files), and it is not lost in any way.
> >
>
> Glad to hear it. When it is ready we'll include it in a release.
>
> It is reasonable to discuss and balance between these two interests:
>
> a) Those who have already completed work they committed to doing for
> the release.
>
> and
>
> b) Those who have not yet completed the work they committed to doing
> and are asking for a delay.
>
> We can have that discussion and work something out.
>
> On the other hand I give very little weight to:
>
> c) Those who are not doing work, but only wish that someone else does
> work, work not part of the agreed-upon plan, and wish to delay the
> release until someone else does the work
>
> I hope you understand why it is not reasonable to give much weight to
> c). The passive voice "X should be done" carries zero weight around
> here. The active voice "I want to do X" is much better.
>
No actually I dont...I hear you say just because I am not capable of making
online help myself, I cannot have an opinion of whether or not it is
important.
I care a lot about the full products, even though I am not capable of
developing large parts of it...I assume I could say the same about you and
at the same time I think both of us have opinions on many aspects of AOO.
I think a lot of people have invested lots of time in preparing the 4.0
release (I know I have only done little pieces), and it would be a shame to
release the 4.0 highlight feature amputated.
rgds
Jan I.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> > rgds
> > Jan I.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of
> >> our
> >> > community that is not fully comfortable with this.
> >> >
> >> > That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we
> have
> >> > estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need
> to
> >> be
> >> > complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time frame
> >> would
> >> > be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with
> that?
> >> >
> >> > Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
> >> > questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a
> decision
> >> as a
> >> > project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
> >> something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
> >> Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
> >> plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
> >> languages, even selected new features.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > A
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:25 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 25 April 2013 19:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> > <snip snip snip>
>> >
>> >>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a
>> selfmade
>> >>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of
>> >>>>> me
>> >>>>
>> >>>> to
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> stand in the way.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
>> >>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3
>> or
>> >>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
>> >>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a
>> >>>
>> >>> major release.
>> >>>
>> >>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will
>> silence
>> >>> myself. You
>> >>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according
>> >>> the
>> >>> apache way,
>> >>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is
>> acceptable.
>> >>
>> >> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else steps
>> >> in ;-)
>> >>
>> >> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
>> >> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
>> >> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I believe
>> >> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
>> >> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project and
>> >> in the product. It's not easy ...
>> >>
>> >> Juergen
>> >>
>> > Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making here?
>> On
>> > one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen which trim
>> > features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release. On
>> the
>> > other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to whether
>> > there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e.
>> pushing
>> > back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a solid
>> > understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision as a
>> > project?"
>> >
>> > To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO 4.0
>> > which are currently in jeopardy:
>> >
>> > * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has a
>> > major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
>> > and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
>>
> This is important to me.
>
Those who are actually doing this work also think it is important.
Otherwise they would not be doing it. But it is not part of the 4.0
plan that we've been executing on.
>> > * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use the
>> > po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
>>
> to me this is nice to have, but does not afftect end-users.
>
>> > and the new pootle server infrastructure.
>>
> Is ready in approx. 1 week.
>
>> > * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
>> > question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
>> > timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
>> > screens + color schemes + ??)
>>
> This is to a must for 4.0, we cannot change brand with 4.01
>
And that's why we're working on the logo survey now, after collecting
40 proposals. We'll certainly have a new logo and splash screen for
4.0. But currently no one at all is working on branding changes
beyond that. at least no work that is on the lists, Items that no
one is working on will not happen not matter how much time we wait.
>> >
>> >
>> > I see a few directions that this could go:
>> >
>> > 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
>> > originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
>> > 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
>> > completely
>> >
>>
>> We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months from
>> now.
>>
>> 3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
>> >
>> >
>> > I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
>>
>> Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
>> almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
>> 3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
>> added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
>> we're withholding from users at the same time.
>>
> Are we really withholding any major features...when I compare the codebases
> I cannot really see it, but I might be wrong.
>
Yes, many, many interop fixes. 100 or so were listed on the blog awhile ago:
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/merging_lotus_symphony_allegro_moderato
>
>>
>> One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
>> that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
>> likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this back?
>> We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
>> more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
>> preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
>>
> This is a maintenence release, which could have been done in 3.4.1, and
> still can be done as 3.4.2.
>
We could have done many things in the past. But the plan we agreed on
was to do these things for AOO 4.0.
> Please remember 4.0 is a major release.
>
Only if we release it. Otherwise it is nothing.
>>
>> IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
>> wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
>> plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
>>
>> I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
>> ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
>> was not ready.
>>
> That work is first of all only in the very beginning (see mails from jürgen
> regarding po files), and it is not lost in any way.
>
Glad to hear it. When it is ready we'll include it in a release.
It is reasonable to discuss and balance between these two interests:
a) Those who have already completed work they committed to doing for
the release.
and
b) Those who have not yet completed the work they committed to doing
and are asking for a delay.
We can have that discussion and work something out.
On the other hand I give very little weight to:
c) Those who are not doing work, but only wish that someone else does
work, work not part of the agreed-upon plan, and wish to delay the
release until someone else does the work
I hope you understand why it is not reasonable to give much weight to
c). The passive voice "X should be done" carries zero weight around
here. The active voice "I want to do X" is much better.
Regards,
-Rob
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
>>
>>
>> > Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of
>> our
>> > community that is not fully comfortable with this.
>> >
>> > That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we have
>> > estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need to
>> be
>> > complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time frame
>> would
>> > be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with that?
>> >
>> > Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
>> > questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a decision
>> as a
>> > project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
>> >
>>
>> Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
>> something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
>> Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
>> plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
>> languages, even selected new features.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > A
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 25 April 2013 19:42, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>
> >> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > <snip snip snip>
> >
> >>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a
> selfmade
> >>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of
> >>>>> me
> >>>>
> >>>> to
> >>>>>
> >>>>> stand in the way.
> >>>>
> >>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
> >>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
> >>>>
> >>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3
> or
> >>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
> >>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
> >>>>
> >>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a
> >>>
> >>> major release.
> >>>
> >>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will
> silence
> >>> myself. You
> >>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according
> >>> the
> >>> apache way,
> >>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is
> acceptable.
> >>
> >> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else steps
> >> in ;-)
> >>
> >> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
> >> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
> >> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I believe
> >> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
> >> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project and
> >> in the product. It's not easy ...
> >>
> >> Juergen
> >>
> > Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making here?
> On
> > one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen which trim
> > features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release. On
> the
> > other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to whether
> > there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e.
> pushing
> > back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a solid
> > understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision as a
> > project?"
> >
> > To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO 4.0
> > which are currently in jeopardy:
> >
> > * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has a
> > major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
> > and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
>
This is important to me.
> > * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use the
> > po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
>
to me this is nice to have, but does not afftect end-users.
> > and the new pootle server infrastructure.
>
Is ready in approx. 1 week.
> > * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
> > question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
> > timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
> > screens + color schemes + ??)
>
This is to a must for 4.0, we cannot change brand with 4.01
> >
> >
> > I see a few directions that this could go:
> >
> > 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
> > originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
> > 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
> > completely
> >
>
> We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months from
> now.
>
> 3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
> >
> >
> > I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
>
> Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
> almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
> 3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
> added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
> we're withholding from users at the same time.
>
Are we really withholding any major features...when I compare the codebases
I cannot really see it, but I might be wrong.
>
> One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
> that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
> likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this back?
> We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
> more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
> preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
>
This is a maintenence release, which could have been done in 3.4.1, and
still can be done as 3.4.2.
Please remember 4.0 is a major release.
>
> IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
> wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
> plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
>
> I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
> ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
> was not ready.
>
That work is first of all only in the very beginning (see mails from jürgen
regarding po files), and it is not lost in any way.
rgds
Jan I.
>
>
> > Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of
> our
> > community that is not fully comfortable with this.
> >
> > That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we have
> > estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need to
> be
> > complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time frame
> would
> > be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with that?
> >
> > Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
> > questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a decision
> as a
> > project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
> >
>
> Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
> something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
> Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
> plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
> languages, even selected new features.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> > A
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> <snip snip snip>
>
>>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
>>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of
>>>>> me
>>>>
>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>> stand in the way.
>>>>
>>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
>>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
>>>>
>>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3 or
>>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
>>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
>>>>
>>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a
>>>
>>> major release.
>>>
>>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will silence
>>> myself. You
>>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according
>>> the
>>> apache way,
>>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is acceptable.
>>
>> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else steps
>> in ;-)
>>
>> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
>> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
>> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I believe
>> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
>> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project and
>> in the product. It's not easy ...
>>
>> Juergen
>>
> Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making here? On
> one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by Jürgen which trim
> features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and complete release. On the
> other hand, we have we have the reasonable question by Jan, as to whether
> there is an alternative approach that sacrifices the schedule (i.e. pushing
> back release date) for the features. My question is "Do we have a solid
> understanding of this trade-off, and should we make this decision as a
> project?"
>
> To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO 4.0
> which are currently in jeopardy:
>
> * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has a
> major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
> and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
> * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use the
> po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
> and the new pootle server infrastructure.
> * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
> question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
> timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
> screens + color schemes + ??)
>
>
> I see a few directions that this could go:
>
> 1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
> originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
> 2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
> completely
>
We're coming into summertime and vacations. Nothing happens 3 months from now.
3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
>
>
> I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
Remember that is how this already feels for those who checked in code
almost a year ago, when they were working on the trunk while work on
3.4.1 was occurring in a branch. There is always more that can be
added, if we wait. But there are also a lot of improvements that
we're withholding from users at the same time.
One thing already in the code is a fix to a horrendous random crash
that hits users who upgrade from OOo 3.3.0. Millions of users are
likely crashing because of this. Do we really want to hold this back?
We should consider not only the additional stuff we could do with
more time on this release, but also all the stuff that we are
preventing users from accessing every day we delay further.
IA2 is not a regression. It is a new feature that is not yet done. I
wouldn't hold back anything there. It is progressing per the original
plan, for AOO 4.1. It was never in the plan for AOO 4.0, right?
I think we already punted on the translation work for AOO 4.0. I was
ready to start recruiting translators but stopped since we said that
was not ready.
> Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of our
> community that is not fully comfortable with this.
>
> That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we have
> estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need to be
> complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time frame would
> be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable with that?
>
> Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
> questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a decision as a
> project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
>
Another option is to recognize that we'll probably need a 4.0.1 or
something, later this summer, to fix any critical bugs that we miss.
Of course, we hope this will not be necessarily, but it is prudent to
plan for this possibility. This release could accommodate new
languages, even selected new features.
Regards,
-Rob
> A
>
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
>> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
>>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
>>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
<snip snip snip>
>>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
>>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of me
>>> to
>>>> stand in the way.
>>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
>>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
>>>
>>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3 or
>>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
>>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
>>>
>>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a
>> major release.
>>
>> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will silence
>> myself. You
>> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according the
>> apache way,
>> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is acceptable.
> I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else steps
> in ;-)
>
> And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
> fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
> Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I believe
> we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
> necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project and
> in the product. It's not easy ...
>
> Juergen
>
Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making
here? On one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by
Jürgen which trim features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and
complete release. On the other hand, we have we have the reasonable
question by Jan, as to whether there is an alternative approach that
sacrifices the schedule (i.e. pushing back release date) for the
features. My question is "Do we have a solid understanding of this
trade-off, and should we make this decision as a project?"
To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO 4.0
which are currently in jeopardy:
* Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has a
major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
* New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use the
po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
and the new pootle server infrastructure.
* Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
timeframe necessary. (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
screens + color schemes + ??)
I see a few directions that this could go:
1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
completely
3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features
I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of
our community that is not fully comfortable with this.
That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we have
estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need to
be complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)? If the time
frame would be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable
with that?
Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these
questions? Then with a more full understanding, can we make a decision
as a project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?
A
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
>>> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
>>>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus
>>>> on the
>>>>>>>>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will
>>>> follow
>>>>>>>>>> immediately.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to
>>>> get an
>>>>>>>>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is the status of sidebar online help ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most
>>>> intuitive
>>>>>>>> format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to
>>>> figure
>>>>>>>> out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online
>>>> help,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> who
>>>>>>> ever makes it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it
>> in
>>>>>> time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so
>> critical,
>>>>>> it would be of course good to have it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a
>>>>>> solution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well you know I cannot provide a solution, at least not within the
>>>>> timeframe given.
>>>>>
>>>>> To me it would be a show stopper if the sidebar contains no help while
>>>> the
>>>>> old parts has help, or even worse non-translated help.
>>>>>
>>>>> Asking for a proposal is very fair.
>>>>>
>>>>> My top goal is to be consistent, so either:
>>>>> 1) someone from doc. or elsewhere works on online help for the
>> sidebar, I
>>>>> can with my limited knowledge help with the integration.
>>>>> 2) or we remove online help completly, stating it is being reworked.
>>>>>
>>>>> Our users are used to online help, and with a big new feature like the
>>>>> sidebar, for sure many of them will seek online help in the way they
>> are
>>>>> used to, and be confused why the old features have help and the new
>>>>> important one hasnt.
>>>>>
>>>>> To me this a very important issue:
>>>>>
>>>>> do we want to keep a dealine for the sake of the deadline and sacrife
>> our
>>>>> users, or do we want to release a "professional" product. In my mind
>>>> there
>>>>> are no doubt about the answer.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> we don't want to keep a deadline only for the sake of the deadline. We
>>>> should be simply realistic, if nobody works on it we won't get one and
>> it
>>>> makes no sense to postpone the release because of a missing online help
>> for
>>>> one feature.
>>>> We have released languages where the online help is not or only partial
>>>> localized. This was and is fine as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> But of course it is not my opinion alone that counts, so lets have a
>>>>> discussion...feel free to convince me why my point of view is wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am simply realistic, if somebody steps forward and tell me that he/she
>>>> can provide a basic online help for the sidebar in 1 week I would
>> volunteer
>>>> to merge and update the po files ones more to include the help in the
>>>> translation process. If not I would move it to 4.1 because I believe
>> that
>>>> the online help is not so important .
>>>>
>>>
>>> Fair, I believe it is very important....if you have a new feature and
>> dont
>>> know how it works you go to the online help, like you do in all other
>>> parts. Of course if the product does not have online help at all, you
>> would
>>> also not expect it for a new feature.
>>
>> well I use integrated help rather seldom and search more often in the
>> web if I need help.
>>
>> But in general if such a new shining and visible feature like the
>> sidebar is not intuitive to use we have already made the first mistake
>> and that will no available online help change ;-)
>>
>> Thas is a nice killer argument...why do we provide help at all, when our
> system is so intuitive.
>
> maybe because we reach out, not only to skilled users as you and me :-)
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> To put a bit more direct, if you bought a new car, and there was no
>> manual
>>> explaining how the new fancy voice activated radio worked, would you be
>>> happy ? I would not.
>>>
>>> The 1 week is a selfmade deadline, that can be shifted as we like, we do
>>> not break a contract or anything if we postpone the release.
>>>
>>
>> We are planning more or less in 6 months cycles and I think this is a
>> good approach. I would of course like to see more new stuff and more
>> bugs fixed. But as always the work have to done.
>>
>> I would prefer a regular release cycle (more a train model) where we are
>> flexible but where we try to hold the deadlines.
>>
>> If we move the deadlines every time somebody thinks we need a further
>> fix, improvement, missing translation or whatever we ill have problems
>> to release something at all.
>>
> hmmmm. I agree on your train model for maintenance/minor releases, but this
> is a major release...
> you see big companies postponing major releases because they want to
> deliver a rounded
> off product.
>
> I strongly disagree, that releasing just because it said so in the
> calender, that is not a good idea....
> where do we draw the line, we are on a sliding path here. Is it ok to
> release if a single button does not work,
> if a single panel does not work, or even if a major function is broken...I
> am not the one to set the limit, but
> we should define that very carefull.
>
>
>>
>> The deadline is known for some time and incompatible work should have
>> been done already. Everything else can be moved to a 4.1, 4.2 or when it
>> is ready. I don't see a problem, if a fix or feature can't make it for
>> the deadline, it will be integrated in the next.
>>
>> And in general we should create a plan what should be in next release or
>> where we want to put the focus for our next release. It's fine if
>> everybody makes what he/she want, especially regarding bug fixes. But
>> for bigger features or directions I would like to see a plan where we
>> can all agree and where we work together to achieve this plan.
>>
>> For example for a 4.1 I can imagine to focus on OOXML support as one key
>> feature. You can see as a motto for the release, a focus area ...
>>
>>
>>> WE should in general be very carefull about moving features from 4.0 to
>>> 4.1. 4.0 is a major release, where we can allow ourself (with good
>> reason)
>>> to be incompatible, whereas 4.1. is a maintenance release and a bit. I do
>>> not like the tendency at the moment to push everything difficult or
>>> unpleasant to 4.1, just to keep the 4.0 deadline.
>>
>> we should more careful the next time when we put something on this plan
>> that we can't achieve. I will for sure not put anything on the plan that
>> I can't provide in time.
>>
>> But nevertheless a plan is necessary that we can organize the missing
>> pieces in time. Coordinate development work with QA, documentation etc.
>>
> Of course a plan is needed, I totally agree with that...I just disagree
> with what happens if a
> feature does not meet the quality level I would expect.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
>>> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of me
>> to
>>> stand in the way.
>>
>> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
>> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
>>
>> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3 or
>> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
>> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
>>
>> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a
> major release.
>
> However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will silence
> myself. You
> are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according the
> apache way,
> it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is acceptable.
I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else steps
in ;-)
And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I believe
we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project and
in the product. It's not easy ...
Juergen
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> jan I.
>>>
>>> Ps. I think the sidebar is a fantastic feature, and I also like the other
>>> features I have seen (and understood).
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juergen
>>>>>
>>>>> rgds
>>>>> jan I
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Juergen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But for the future we need probably somthing new.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain,
>>>> but
>>>>>>> this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is
>>>> that
>>>>>>> we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> editing,
>>>>>>> but a nice job for a new volunteer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example
>>>> 4986
>>>>>>>>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or
>>>> translation
>>>>>>>>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to
>>>> work on
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week
>>>> that we can
>>>>>>>>>> start with the work.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm,
>>>> then I
>>>>>>>>> will copy them to the new vm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ok
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0
>>>> related
>>>>>>>>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the
>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>> Pootle server.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion
>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>> and Infra.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> what kind of discussion?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer
>>>> login
>>>>>>> (aoo version rob/andrea)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Juergen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> rgds
>>>>>>>>> Jan I.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> >>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> >>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus
> >> on the
> >>>>>>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will
> >> follow
> >>>>>>>> immediately.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to
> >> get an
> >>>>>>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What is the status of sidebar online help ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most
> >> intuitive
> >>>>>> format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to
> >> figure
> >>>>>> out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online
> >> help,
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> who
> >>>>> ever makes it.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it
> in
> >>>> time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so
> critical,
> >>>> it would be of course good to have it.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a
> >>>> solution.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Well you know I cannot provide a solution, at least not within the
> >>> timeframe given.
> >>>
> >>> To me it would be a show stopper if the sidebar contains no help while
> >> the
> >>> old parts has help, or even worse non-translated help.
> >>>
> >>> Asking for a proposal is very fair.
> >>>
> >>> My top goal is to be consistent, so either:
> >>> 1) someone from doc. or elsewhere works on online help for the
> sidebar, I
> >>> can with my limited knowledge help with the integration.
> >>> 2) or we remove online help completly, stating it is being reworked.
> >>>
> >>> Our users are used to online help, and with a big new feature like the
> >>> sidebar, for sure many of them will seek online help in the way they
> are
> >>> used to, and be confused why the old features have help and the new
> >>> important one hasnt.
> >>>
> >>> To me this a very important issue:
> >>>
> >>> do we want to keep a dealine for the sake of the deadline and sacrife
> our
> >>> users, or do we want to release a "professional" product. In my mind
> >> there
> >>> are no doubt about the answer.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> we don't want to keep a deadline only for the sake of the deadline. We
> >> should be simply realistic, if nobody works on it we won't get one and
> it
> >> makes no sense to postpone the release because of a missing online help
> for
> >> one feature.
> >> We have released languages where the online help is not or only partial
> >> localized. This was and is fine as well.
> >>>
> >>> But of course it is not my opinion alone that counts, so lets have a
> >>> discussion...feel free to convince me why my point of view is wrong.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> I am simply realistic, if somebody steps forward and tell me that he/she
> >> can provide a basic online help for the sidebar in 1 week I would
> volunteer
> >> to merge and update the po files ones more to include the help in the
> >> translation process. If not I would move it to 4.1 because I believe
> that
> >> the online help is not so important .
> >>
> >
> > Fair, I believe it is very important....if you have a new feature and
> dont
> > know how it works you go to the online help, like you do in all other
> > parts. Of course if the product does not have online help at all, you
> would
> > also not expect it for a new feature.
>
> well I use integrated help rather seldom and search more often in the
> web if I need help.
>
> But in general if such a new shining and visible feature like the
> sidebar is not intuitive to use we have already made the first mistake
> and that will no available online help change ;-)
>
> Thas is a nice killer argument...why do we provide help at all, when our
system is so intuitive.
maybe because we reach out, not only to skilled users as you and me :-)
>
> >
> > To put a bit more direct, if you bought a new car, and there was no
> manual
> > explaining how the new fancy voice activated radio worked, would you be
> > happy ? I would not.
> >
> > The 1 week is a selfmade deadline, that can be shifted as we like, we do
> > not break a contract or anything if we postpone the release.
> >
>
> We are planning more or less in 6 months cycles and I think this is a
> good approach. I would of course like to see more new stuff and more
> bugs fixed. But as always the work have to done.
>
> I would prefer a regular release cycle (more a train model) where we are
> flexible but where we try to hold the deadlines.
>
> If we move the deadlines every time somebody thinks we need a further
> fix, improvement, missing translation or whatever we ill have problems
> to release something at all.
>
hmmmm. I agree on your train model for maintenance/minor releases, but this
is a major release...
you see big companies postponing major releases because they want to
deliver a rounded
off product.
I strongly disagree, that releasing just because it said so in the
calender, that is not a good idea....
where do we draw the line, we are on a sliding path here. Is it ok to
release if a single button does not work,
if a single panel does not work, or even if a major function is broken...I
am not the one to set the limit, but
we should define that very carefull.
>
> The deadline is known for some time and incompatible work should have
> been done already. Everything else can be moved to a 4.1, 4.2 or when it
> is ready. I don't see a problem, if a fix or feature can't make it for
> the deadline, it will be integrated in the next.
>
> And in general we should create a plan what should be in next release or
> where we want to put the focus for our next release. It's fine if
> everybody makes what he/she want, especially regarding bug fixes. But
> for bigger features or directions I would like to see a plan where we
> can all agree and where we work together to achieve this plan.
>
> For example for a 4.1 I can imagine to focus on OOXML support as one key
> feature. You can see as a motto for the release, a focus area ...
>
>
> > WE should in general be very carefull about moving features from 4.0 to
> > 4.1. 4.0 is a major release, where we can allow ourself (with good
> reason)
> > to be incompatible, whereas 4.1. is a maintenance release and a bit. I do
> > not like the tendency at the moment to push everything difficult or
> > unpleasant to 4.1, just to keep the 4.0 deadline.
>
> we should more careful the next time when we put something on this plan
> that we can't achieve. I will for sure not put anything on the plan that
> I can't provide in time.
>
> But nevertheless a plan is necessary that we can organize the missing
> pieces in time. Coordinate development work with QA, documentation etc.
>
Of course a plan is needed, I totally agree with that...I just disagree
with what happens if a
feature does not meet the quality level I would expect.
>
> >
> > But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
> > deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of me
> to
> > stand in the way.
>
> See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
> the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
>
> Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3 or
> 4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
> mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
>
> this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a
major release.
However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will silence
myself. You
are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according the
apache way,
it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is acceptable.
rgds
jan I.
>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > jan I.
> >
> > Ps. I think the sidebar is a fantastic feature, and I also like the other
> > features I have seen (and understood).
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Juergen
> >>>
> >>> rgds
> >>> jan I
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Juergen
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But for the future we need probably somthing new.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain,
> >> but
> >>>>> this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is
> >> that
> >>>>> we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> editing,
> >>>>> but a nice job for a new volunteer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example
> >> 4986
> >>>>>>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> already
> >>>>>>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or
> >> translation
> >>>>>>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to
> >> work on
> >>>> it.
> >>>>>>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week
> >> that we can
> >>>>>>>> start with the work.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm,
> >> then I
> >>>>>>> will copy them to the new vm.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ok
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0
> >> related
> >>>>>>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the
> >> new
> >>>>>>>> Pootle server.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion
> >> between
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> AOO
> >>>>>>> and Infra.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> what kind of discussion?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer
> >> login
> >>>>> (aoo version rob/andrea)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Juergen
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> rgds
> >>>>>>> Jan I.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:
> On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
>>> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus
>> on the
>>>>>>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will
>> follow
>>>>>>>> immediately.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to
>> get an
>>>>>>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is the status of sidebar online help ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most
>> intuitive
>>>>>> format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to
>> figure
>>>>>> out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online
>> help,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> who
>>>>> ever makes it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it in
>>>> time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so critical,
>>>> it would be of course good to have it.
>>>>
>>>> If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a
>>>> solution.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well you know I cannot provide a solution, at least not within the
>>> timeframe given.
>>>
>>> To me it would be a show stopper if the sidebar contains no help while
>> the
>>> old parts has help, or even worse non-translated help.
>>>
>>> Asking for a proposal is very fair.
>>>
>>> My top goal is to be consistent, so either:
>>> 1) someone from doc. or elsewhere works on online help for the sidebar, I
>>> can with my limited knowledge help with the integration.
>>> 2) or we remove online help completly, stating it is being reworked.
>>>
>>> Our users are used to online help, and with a big new feature like the
>>> sidebar, for sure many of them will seek online help in the way they are
>>> used to, and be confused why the old features have help and the new
>>> important one hasnt.
>>>
>>> To me this a very important issue:
>>>
>>> do we want to keep a dealine for the sake of the deadline and sacrife our
>>> users, or do we want to release a "professional" product. In my mind
>> there
>>> are no doubt about the answer.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> we don't want to keep a deadline only for the sake of the deadline. We
>> should be simply realistic, if nobody works on it we won't get one and it
>> makes no sense to postpone the release because of a missing online help for
>> one feature.
>> We have released languages where the online help is not or only partial
>> localized. This was and is fine as well.
>>>
>>> But of course it is not my opinion alone that counts, so lets have a
>>> discussion...feel free to convince me why my point of view is wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I am simply realistic, if somebody steps forward and tell me that he/she
>> can provide a basic online help for the sidebar in 1 week I would volunteer
>> to merge and update the po files ones more to include the help in the
>> translation process. If not I would move it to 4.1 because I believe that
>> the online help is not so important .
>>
>
> Fair, I believe it is very important....if you have a new feature and dont
> know how it works you go to the online help, like you do in all other
> parts. Of course if the product does not have online help at all, you would
> also not expect it for a new feature.
well I use integrated help rather seldom and search more often in the
web if I need help.
But in general if such a new shining and visible feature like the
sidebar is not intuitive to use we have already made the first mistake
and that will no available online help change ;-)
>
> To put a bit more direct, if you bought a new car, and there was no manual
> explaining how the new fancy voice activated radio worked, would you be
> happy ? I would not.
>
> The 1 week is a selfmade deadline, that can be shifted as we like, we do
> not break a contract or anything if we postpone the release.
>
We are planning more or less in 6 months cycles and I think this is a
good approach. I would of course like to see more new stuff and more
bugs fixed. But as always the work have to done.
I would prefer a regular release cycle (more a train model) where we are
flexible but where we try to hold the deadlines.
If we move the deadlines every time somebody thinks we need a further
fix, improvement, missing translation or whatever we ill have problems
to release something at all.
The deadline is known for some time and incompatible work should have
been done already. Everything else can be moved to a 4.1, 4.2 or when it
is ready. I don't see a problem, if a fix or feature can't make it for
the deadline, it will be integrated in the next.
And in general we should create a plan what should be in next release or
where we want to put the focus for our next release. It's fine if
everybody makes what he/she want, especially regarding bug fixes. But
for bigger features or directions I would like to see a plan where we
can all agree and where we work together to achieve this plan.
For example for a 4.1 I can imagine to focus on OOXML support as one key
feature. You can see as a motto for the release, a focus area ...
> WE should in general be very carefull about moving features from 4.0 to
> 4.1. 4.0 is a major release, where we can allow ourself (with good reason)
> to be incompatible, whereas 4.1. is a maintenance release and a bit. I do
> not like the tendency at the moment to push everything difficult or
> unpleasant to 4.1, just to keep the 4.0 deadline.
we should more careful the next time when we put something on this plan
that we can't achieve. I will for sure not put anything on the plan that
I can't provide in time.
But nevertheless a plan is necessary that we can organize the missing
pieces in time. Coordinate development work with QA, documentation etc.
>
> But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
> deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of me to
> stand in the way.
See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.
Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3 or
4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
mainly bugs and potential security fixes.
Juergen
>
> jan I.
>
> Ps. I think the sidebar is a fantastic feature, and I also like the other
> features I have seen (and understood).
>
>
>>
>> Juergen
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> jan I
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juergen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But for the future we need probably somthing new.
>>>>>
>>>>> yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain,
>> but
>>>>> this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is
>> that
>>>>> we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> editing,
>>>>> but a nice job for a new volunteer.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example
>> 4986
>>>>>>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> already
>>>>>>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or
>> translation
>>>>>>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to
>> work on
>>>> it.
>>>>>>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week
>> that we can
>>>>>>>> start with the work.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm,
>> then I
>>>>>>> will copy them to the new vm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ok
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0
>> related
>>>>>>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the
>> new
>>>>>>>> Pootle server.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion
>> between
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>> and Infra.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what kind of discussion?
>>>>>
>>>>> Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer
>> login
>>>>> (aoo version rob/andrea)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Juergen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> rgds
>>>>>>> Jan I.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> > On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> > > > On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> > > > > > On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus
> on the
> > > > > > > languages that we have already released. All other langs will
> follow
> > > > > > > immediately.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to
> get an
> > > > > > > impression of how much work we have to do.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is the status of sidebar online help ?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most
> intuitive
> > > > > format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to
> figure
> > > > > out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online
> help,
> > > >
> > >
> > > who
> > > > ever makes it.
> > >
> > >
> > > mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it in
> > > time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so critical,
> > > it would be of course good to have it.
> > >
> > > If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a
> > > solution.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Well you know I cannot provide a solution, at least not within the
> > timeframe given.
> >
> > To me it would be a show stopper if the sidebar contains no help while
> the
> > old parts has help, or even worse non-translated help.
> >
> > Asking for a proposal is very fair.
> >
> > My top goal is to be consistent, so either:
> > 1) someone from doc. or elsewhere works on online help for the sidebar, I
> > can with my limited knowledge help with the integration.
> > 2) or we remove online help completly, stating it is being reworked.
> >
> > Our users are used to online help, and with a big new feature like the
> > sidebar, for sure many of them will seek online help in the way they are
> > used to, and be confused why the old features have help and the new
> > important one hasnt.
> >
> > To me this a very important issue:
> >
> > do we want to keep a dealine for the sake of the deadline and sacrife our
> > users, or do we want to release a "professional" product. In my mind
> there
> > are no doubt about the answer.
> >
> >
>
> we don't want to keep a deadline only for the sake of the deadline. We
> should be simply realistic, if nobody works on it we won't get one and it
> makes no sense to postpone the release because of a missing online help for
> one feature.
> We have released languages where the online help is not or only partial
> localized. This was and is fine as well.
> >
> > But of course it is not my opinion alone that counts, so lets have a
> > discussion...feel free to convince me why my point of view is wrong.
> >
> >
>
> I am simply realistic, if somebody steps forward and tell me that he/she
> can provide a basic online help for the sidebar in 1 week I would volunteer
> to merge and update the po files ones more to include the help in the
> translation process. If not I would move it to 4.1 because I believe that
> the online help is not so important .
>
Fair, I believe it is very important....if you have a new feature and dont
know how it works you go to the online help, like you do in all other
parts. Of course if the product does not have online help at all, you would
also not expect it for a new feature.
To put a bit more direct, if you bought a new car, and there was no manual
explaining how the new fancy voice activated radio worked, would you be
happy ? I would not.
The 1 week is a selfmade deadline, that can be shifted as we like, we do
not break a contract or anything if we postpone the release.
WE should in general be very carefull about moving features from 4.0 to
4.1. 4.0 is a major release, where we can allow ourself (with good reason)
to be incompatible, whereas 4.1. is a maintenance release and a bit. I do
not like the tendency at the moment to push everything difficult or
unpleasant to 4.1, just to keep the 4.0 deadline.
But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of me to
stand in the way.
jan I.
Ps. I think the sidebar is a fantastic feature, and I also like the other
features I have seen (and understood).
>
> Juergen
> >
> > rgds
> > jan I
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Juergen
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But for the future we need probably somthing new.
> > > >
> > > > yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain,
> but
> > > > this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is
> that
> > > > we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of
> > > >
> > >
> > > editing,
> > > > but a nice job for a new volunteer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example
> 4986
> > > > > > > strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > already
> > > > > > > available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or
> translation
> > > > > > > memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to
> work on
> > > it.
> > > > > > > But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week
> that we can
> > > > > > > start with the work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm,
> then I
> > > > > > will copy them to the new vm.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ok
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0
> related
> > > > > > > projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the
> new
> > > > > > > Pootle server.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion
> between
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > AOO
> > > > > > and Infra.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > what kind of discussion?
> > > >
> > > > Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer
> login
> > > > (aoo version rob/andrea)
> > > >
> > > > I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
> > > >
> > > > Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Juergen
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > rgds
> > > > > > Jan I.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Juergen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:
> On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> > > On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> > > > > On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> > > > > > languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> > > > > > immediately.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> > > > > > impression of how much work we have to do.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the status of sidebar online help ?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most intuitive
> > > > format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to figure
> > > > out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online help,
> > >
> >
> > who
> > > ever makes it.
> >
> >
> > mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it in
> > time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so critical,
> > it would be of course good to have it.
> >
> > If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a
> > solution.
> >
>
>
> Well you know I cannot provide a solution, at least not within the
> timeframe given.
>
> To me it would be a show stopper if the sidebar contains no help while the
> old parts has help, or even worse non-translated help.
>
> Asking for a proposal is very fair.
>
> My top goal is to be consistent, so either:
> 1) someone from doc. or elsewhere works on online help for the sidebar, I
> can with my limited knowledge help with the integration.
> 2) or we remove online help completly, stating it is being reworked.
>
> Our users are used to online help, and with a big new feature like the
> sidebar, for sure many of them will seek online help in the way they are
> used to, and be confused why the old features have help and the new
> important one hasnt.
>
> To me this a very important issue:
>
> do we want to keep a dealine for the sake of the deadline and sacrife our
> users, or do we want to release a "professional" product. In my mind there
> are no doubt about the answer.
>
>
we don't want to keep a deadline only for the sake of the deadline. We should be simply realistic, if nobody works on it we won't get one and it makes no sense to postpone the release because of a missing online help for one feature.
We have released languages where the online help is not or only partial localized. This was and is fine as well.
>
> But of course it is not my opinion alone that counts, so lets have a
> discussion...feel free to convince me why my point of view is wrong.
>
>
I am simply realistic, if somebody steps forward and tell me that he/she can provide a basic online help for the sidebar in 1 week I would volunteer to merge and update the po files ones more to include the help in the translation process. If not I would move it to 4.1 because I believe that the online help is not so important .
Juergen
>
> rgds
> jan I
>
>
> >
> > Juergen
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > But for the future we need probably somthing new.
> > >
> > > yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain, but
> > > this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is that
> > > we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of
> > >
> >
> > editing,
> > > but a nice job for a new volunteer.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> > > > > > strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > already
> > > > > > available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> > > > > > memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on
> > it.
> > > > > > But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> > > > > > start with the work.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm, then I
> > > > > will copy them to the new vm.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ok
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> > > > > > projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> > > > > > Pootle server.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion between
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > AOO
> > > > > and Infra.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > what kind of discussion?
> > >
> > > Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer login
> > > (aoo version rob/andrea)
> > >
> > > I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
> > >
> > > Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Juergen
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > rgds
> > > > > Jan I.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> >>> On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> >>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> >>>> immediately.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> >>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
> >>>>
> >>> What is the status of sidebar online help ?
> >>
> >> no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most intuitive
> >> format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to figure
> >> out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
> >>
> > I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online help,
> who
> > ever makes it.
>
> mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it in
> time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so critical,
> it would be of course good to have it.
>
> If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a
> solution.
>
Well you know I cannot provide a solution, at least not within the
timeframe given.
To me it would be a show stopper if the sidebar contains no help while the
old parts has help, or even worse non-translated help.
Asking for a proposal is very fair.
My top goal is to be consistent, so either:
1) someone from doc. or elsewhere works on online help for the sidebar, I
can with my limited knowledge help with the integration.
2) or we remove online help completly, stating it is being reworked.
Our users are used to online help, and with a big new feature like the
sidebar, for sure many of them will seek online help in the way they are
used to, and be confused why the old features have help and the new
important one hasnt.
To me this a very important issue:
do we want to keep a dealine for the sake of the deadline and sacrife our
users, or do we want to release a "professional" product. In my mind there
are no doubt about the answer.
But of course it is not my opinion alone that counts, so lets have a
discussion...feel free to convince me why my point of view is wrong.
rgds
jan I
>
> Juergen
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> But for the future we need probably somthing new.
> >>
> >
> > yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain, but
> > this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is that
> > we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of
> editing,
> > but a nice job for a new volunteer.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> >>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be
> already
> >>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> >>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on
> it.
> >>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> >>>> start with the work.
> >>>>
> >>> Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm, then I
> >>> will copy them to the new vm.
> >>
> >> ok
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> >>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> >>>> Pootle server.
> >>>>
> >>> The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion between
> >> AOO
> >>> and Infra.
> >>
> >> what kind of discussion?
> >>
> >
> > Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer login
> > (aoo version rob/andrea)
> >
> > I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
> >
> > Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Juergen
> >>
> >>>
> >>> rgds
> >>> Jan I.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
>>> On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>>>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>>>> immediately.
>>>>
>>>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>>>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>>>
>>> What is the status of sidebar online help ?
>>
>> no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most intuitive
>> format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to figure
>> out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
>>
> I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online help, who
> ever makes it.
mmh, I am not sure if nobody will work on it and if we won't have it in
time it would be no show stopper to me. Online help is not so critical,
it would be of course good to have it.
If you think it would be a stopper you should provide or propose a solution.
Juergen
>
>
>>
>> But for the future we need probably somthing new.
>>
>
> yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain, but
> this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is that
> we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of editing,
> but a nice job for a new volunteer.
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>>>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>>>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>>>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>>>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>>>> start with the work.
>>>>
>>> Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm, then I
>>> will copy them to the new vm.
>>
>> ok
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>>>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>>>> Pootle server.
>>>>
>>> The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion between
>> AOO
>>> and Infra.
>>
>> what kind of discussion?
>>
>
> Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer login
> (aoo version rob/andrea)
>
> I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
>
> Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
>
>
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> Jan I.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> >> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> >> immediately.
> >>
> >> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> >> impression of how much work we have to do.
> >>
> > What is the status of sidebar online help ?
>
> no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most intuitive
> format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to figure
> out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
>
I hope we agree that we cannot release the sidebar without online help, who
ever makes it.
>
> But for the future we need probably somthing new.
>
yes, I used to use Qt help system, which are quite easy to maintain, but
this is only one of a couple of good candicates. The tricky thing is that
we problaly need to change all the keys in the src files...lots of editing,
but a nice job for a new volunteer.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> >> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
> >> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> >> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
> >
> >
> >> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
> >> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> >> start with the work.
> >>
> > Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm, then I
> > will copy them to the new vm.
>
> ok
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> >> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> >> Pootle server.
> >>
> > The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion between
> AOO
> > and Infra.
>
> what kind of discussion?
>
Only committer login (infra version ) or local login and committer login
(aoo version rob/andrea)
I have given andrea and infra a possible compromise.
Did you not see my mail (private list) ?
>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > rgds
> > Jan I.
> >
> >>
> >> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/22/13 10:18 PM, janI wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
>> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
>> immediately.
>>
>> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
>> impression of how much work we have to do.
>>
> What is the status of sidebar online help ?
no update at the moment. Our xhp file format is not the most intuitive
format and especially the unique id's are tricky. I will try to figure
out how the help authoring tooling works and if we can use it.
But for the future we need probably somthing new.
>
>
>>
>> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
>> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
>> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
>> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>
>
>> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
>> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
>> start with the work.
>>
> Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm, then I
> will copy them to the new vm.
ok
>
>
>>
>> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
>> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
>> Pootle server.
>>
> The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion between AOO
> and Infra.
what kind of discussion?
Juergen
>
> rgds
> Jan I.
>
>>
>> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 22 April 2013 20:54, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> immediately.
>
> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> impression of how much work we have to do.
>
What is the status of sidebar online help ?
>
> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> start with the work.
>
Please mail me, when you have synced the PO files on the old vm, then I
will copy them to the new vm.
>
> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> Pootle server.
>
The new server is in test....and awaits a principle discussion between AOO
and Infra.
rgds
Jan I.
>
> Juergen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Translation for AOO 4.0
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/22/13 8:54 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently preparing po files for AOO 4.0 and will focus on the
> languages that we have already released. All other langs will follow
> immediately.
>
> I have created 2 new projects on the "old" Pootle server to get an
> impression of how much work we have to do.
>
> For the UI in "de" will have to check/translate for example 4986
> strings, I know we have string moved and translations should be already
> available but my knowledge of the language tools and/or translation
> memory is too lazy. any kind of help is appreciated ;-)
>
> I am traveling the next 2 days and have onyl limited time to work on it.
> But I expect to have the po's ready at the end of the week that we can
> start with the work.
>
> I will keep you informed and please don't use the new AOO 4.0 related
> projects as long as I give the ok. We will potentially use the new
> Pootle server.
>
the 28 released languages are on the old pootle server already. I will
provide the po files tomorrow. Further languages will be merged as well.
Please help me to prioritize the order how to proceed. Means I would
like to prefer the languages where we have people working on it already,
like Greek, Turkish, Portuguese ...
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org