On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:19 PM, pravin.d.s@xxxxxxxxx <pravin.d.s@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 16 December 2015 at 21:07, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス U > <puiterwijk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> >>> For this purpose and in line with [1], we were thinking of Fedora >>> Globalization steering committee. I have created initial proposal for >>> it. [2] >> >> Would it instead be an idea to instead of forming a new committee next to the current Internationalization (i18n) >> Fedora subproject, extend that subproject to g11n? > > In fact i think that was idea earlier. I18n group is more active with > Fedora development life cycle. Merge two groups under G11N initiative > and synchronise plus points. i.e. More language experts in L10N and > more developers aligned with Fedora development life cycle in i18n. > > But after executing it for 6 months, i feel though there are few > points to synchronize, there are also number of different topics which > just required sub-group level attention. More L10N and more i18n > expertise. > > So rather than complete merge of activities, just collaborate on > common requirement points under G11N governance/committee group make > sense. I think that should be goal of G11N steering committee. As > given in proposal, it will have members from respective groups. > >> Otherwise, I would personally be a bit confused if I were to contribute to internationalization: would that be the >> i18n subproject, or the g11n subproject (which per definition as far as I understood includes i18n)? > > With new structure. We will have full fledges groups i18n, l10n, QE. > Issues required collaboration or higher level attention should get > handled by people with different expertise where G11N group comes into > picture. > >> >> I do agree that a steering committee directing this subproject would be a good idea, but I think that the proposal >> is a bit underspecified at this moment: "To drive Fedora globalization by providing governance and community >> activity support for Internationalization, Localization and Zanata group." is a very broad, marketing-sounding goal >> in my opinion, and not very clear. > > Agree. I think we need to work further on improving proposal. Added > sentence regarding its Draft status. :) > >> What kinds of things do we want the FGSCo to be governing? >> Would that be things like working with QE to add test cases/release criteria, get more contributors, organize >> events, ...? >> Probably best to expand a bit more, especially if you're also planning to raise funds. > > +1 I saw Localization steering committee objectives was very well > explained. [1] We need to further work on it. > >> >> Also, I am doubtful whether some of these goals are in order for the g11n team, especially: "Raising funds & Budget planning" >> and "Event planning in region/country". I think we should probably ask help from Ambassadors for these parts, since they >> are supposed to have experience with these kinds of things. And while I realize that a lot of g11n people might be ambassadors, >> I am not sure whether we need another committee responsible for all this. (note: this is based on some expectations from me regarding >> goals for this committee, see previous point). > > Good point. !! > For getting fund/budget for G11N activities, we need to work with > Council, Ambassadors/FAMSco group. I am active Ambassadors from last > one year and learned number of activities get planned during budgeting > process. G11N activities i.e. FAD, L10N sprints are presently missing > from it. > > Ambassadors are experts in there country and with the help of > Ambassadors we can try to grow L10N community in respective regions. > We can plan and organize events like L10N sprint specifically in APAC > regions, there is good scope to grow community with such activity. > > This is started happening already with different Ambassadors taking > active role in it. > >>> >>> Its open for feedback, please feel free to share other active members, >>> discuss in your respective language groups. This is just initial >>> proposal and i am sure, we can improve and make it more effective with >>> active participation. >> >> Thank you for getting this process in motion, would be great to see g11n gain more ground in Fedora! > > I will rather say thanks for support :) > In present situation G11N will become successful only when we will > have active L10N community, like we had during 2009. We already have > number of active members and i am sure with all, will find way to make > L10N again active. > > Regards, > Pravin Satpute I am admittedly not deeply involved in these *vital* parts of Fedora, but I would like to help where I can. Please keep me in the loop, as I'm happy to help with coordinating and communicating at the Council/FAMSCo level, as localization/internationalization/translation/globalization move forward together. Happy to help, --RemyD. -- Remy DeCausemaker Fedora Community Lead & Council <decause@xxxxxxxxxx> https://whatcanidoforfedora.org -- i18n mailing list i18n@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/i18n
