On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Petr Kovar <pkovar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We mention the L10n management system for each guide in this table: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs_Project_guides_table I hate to be the one asking the obvious.. but on this topic I feel that very little is being discussed openly. Some obvious Qs, some of which have been pointed out in the past by a number of people: - Have any blocker issues been raised to the Transifex team and haven't been addressed? The issue in question has been asked just 10 days ago, and replied to the same day.. [1] - Have the costs of having two separate platforms been carefully & openly weighted by the L10n community? Has it discussed, requested and approved the usage of another platform? - Since the Fedora Infrastructure has not approved the RFR [2], why has this been deployed outside of Fedora and privately pushed? Right now, a different platform is being shoved down the L10n team's throat without any public discussion or effort to work on top of what we have. This is just wrong. We're Fedora, we can do way better than this guys. -d [1]: https://github.com/transifex/transifex-client/issues/25 [2]: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/2011-June/010532.html -- Dimitri Glezos Founder & CEO, Transifex Social Localization Crowdsourcing https://www.transifex.com/ -- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
