O/H Karsten Wade έγραψε: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 17:34 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> Dimitris Glezos (dimitris@xxxxxxxxxx) said: >>> Our translators have made it clear they want to use a SCM for the translations >>> and said an *additional* web-based tool would be nice. So, let's first create >>> our SCM and we'll see about whether we should use pootle. >> Use *one* SCM. How to gate currently hosted GIT/HG/etc into this is >> unclear. :/ > > A first iteration at a solution could look like this: > > * Projects, regardless of SCM, generate POT file and use WUI or CLI to > schedule pick-up of their POT into l10n.fp.o > > * l10n.fp.o has a WUI that sits in front of >1 SCM and has the ability > to: > - Translate through the WUI (download POT, upload PO) > - Use one account (FAS) for all access (regardless of back-end SCM, it > needs a *l10n group that all L10N members are within) > - Provide statistics across all SCMs > > * For translators who want to use the CLI entirely for translations, > they need to work directly with the SCM, however ... > > Note that I suggest a CLI for access to the same services the WUI is > providing. The idea here would be to grow a CLI (fedoral10n?) that acts > like the WUI - it interacts with >1 back-end SCM, uses FAS for auth+, > etc. > > So, first feature of the fedoral10n CLI would be for developers (and > scripts) to automate the management of POT/PO files. Second feature > would be to give translators equivalent control that the WUI provides. So, we've got two issues with L10N: 1. Enabling proper ACLs on CVS 2. The Web User Interface Mike is working on the first. An RFR for this has been opened at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/RFR/L10nCVSandUI -d -- Dimitris Glezos Jabber ID: glezos@xxxxxxxxxx, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B http://dimitris.glezos.com/ "He who gives up functionality for ease of use loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous) --
