Dimitris Glezos さんは書きました: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Kévin Raymond > <shaiton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 2:32 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, noriko wrote: >>> >>>> hi, >>>> >>>> Sorry replying after closing the ticket, I was traveling Japan last two >>>> weeks and had no internet connection. Now I like you all involved to >>>> reconsider this RFR. >>>> >>>> As Jared pointed, it was clearly agreed to revisit. This offer is great >>>> opportunity for all translators to test new tool which has potential to >>>> be hosted at Fedora ground. And as Mike said, the conversation should >>>> start with translators, so that we will be able to come back. It is best >>>> to have a test instance within fp.o. >>>> >>>> Please notice that this RFR is just asking a test, not a move. As >>>> someone refer to the need or the cost (people power or $$), without >>>> testing, translators will not be able to evaluate those whether it is >>>> worth or not. I like you all to remind that it is not zero cost but it >>>> does cost running transifex for Fedora at tx.net as well, manpower of >>>> Infidex. >>>> >>>> I have been strong supporter of Transifex, and still am confident that >>>> Transifex is excellent tool for translators in some projects. However >>>> there is no reason to deny other tools because it was just >>>> developed/introduced after Transifex. Most of translators even do not >>>> notice this discussion. I beg you, please give us a chance and let us >>>> discuss ourselves before making any decision somewhere we do not know. >>>> Please do not squash the opportunity for us. >>>> >>> They don't notice the discussion because no one has taken it there. I'm >>> not sure why we're even still discussing this here since not a single >>> email has been sent to http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/trans/ wrt >>> Zanata. It's not free for us to just hand over resources that could be >>> better planned. So I suggest again, start with the translators. If >>> someone on the infrastructure team is willing to sponsor it I'm sure >>> they'll speak up but it'd be a much better sell if the translation team >>> actually got together and said "sure, lets take a look" >> From the translator side, the best would be to introduce the tool >> (explain workflow/usage differences) before asking them to try it. > > I also think we should have good documentation before requesting time > to try out a tool -- eg. how does it compare with alternative tools > such as Transifex, Pootle, Damned Lies, especially in the areas that > are important to Fedora. Good point, I believe that the project team should have some documentation. But also it can be said that it is hard to discuss without seeing. A picture is worth a thousand words. >> We should not close our mind, but asking the busy infra to work on >> something that nobody know (from infra as well as translators) is >> quite heavy. Yp, thanks for this input! If this is the case I also disagree. So far, I do not see any manpower requested in this RFR, but I can see that there is the project team already formed and it asks for only approval from Infra team on consuming certain resources. >> The best for now should be to take few translators who will install >> this in their own hardware and try it for few weeks and come back >> later. Personally I understand that it would be difficult for many of translators to install and test it by themselves. It must be much easier and straight forward to provide a sandbox to play around. If the project team can not maintain that sandbox just for a test, it would not be worth to proceed. noriko >> We also need to know the difference in the developer side. > > > _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
