Open Stack

Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-03-10 09:39:29 -0500:
> Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-03-10 09:28:52 -0500:
> > Excerpts from Ian Y. Choi's message of 2017-03-10 01:22:40 +0900:
> > > Doug Hellmann wrote on 3/9/2017 9:24 PM:
> > > > Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2017-03-07 07:17:09 -0600:
> > > >> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:06:18AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
> > > >>> On 03/06/2017 08:43 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> > > >>>> On 2017-03-06 14:03, Sean Dague  wrote:
> > > >>>>> I'm trying to understand the implications of
> > > >>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/439500. And the comment in the linked
> > > >>>>> email:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> ">> Yes, we decided some time ago to not translate the log files anymore and
> > > >>>>>>> thus our tools do not handle them anymore - and in general, we remove
> > > >>>>>>> these kind of files."
> > > >>>>> Does that mean that all the _LE, _LI, _LW stuff in projects should be
> > > >>>>> fully removed? Nova currently enforces those things are there -
> > > >>>>> https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/e88dd0034b1b135d680dae3494597e295add9cfe/nova/hacking/checks.py#L314-L333
> > > >>>>> and want to make sure our tools aren't making us do work that the i18n
> > > >>>>> team is ignoring and throwing away.
> > > >> So... just looking for a definitive statement on this since there has
> > > >> been some back and forth discussion.
> > > >>
> > > >> Is it correct to say - all projects may (should?) now remove all bits in
> > > >> place for using and enforcing the _Lx() translation markers. Only _()
> > > >> should be used for user visible error messages.
> > > >>
> > > >> Sean (smcginnis)
> > > >>
> > > > The situation is still not quite clear to me, and it would be
> > > > unfortunate to undo too much of the translation support work because
> > > > it will be hard to redo it.
> > > >
> > > > Is there documentation somewhere describing what the i18n team has
> > > > committed to trying to translate?
> > > 
> > > I18n team describes translation plan and priority in Zanata - 
> > > translation platform
> > >   : https://translate.openstack.org/ .
> > > 
> > > >   I think I heard that there was a
> > > > shift in emphasis to "user interfaces", but I'm not sure if that
> > > > includes error messages in services. Should we remove all use of
> > > > oslo.i18n from services? Or only when dealing with logs?
> > > 
> > > When I18n team decided to removal of log translations in Barcelona last 
> > > October, there had been no
> > > discussion on the removal of oslo.i18n translation support for log messages.
> > > (I have kept track of what I18n team discussed during Barcelona I18n 
> > > meetup on Etherpad - [1])
> > > 
> > > Now I think that the final decision of oslo.i18n log translation support 
> > > needs more involvement
> > > with translators considering oslo.i18n translation support, and also 
> > > more people on community wide including
> > > project working groups, user committee, and operators as Matt suggested.
> > > 
> > > If translating log messages is meaningful to some community members and 
> > > some translators show interests
> > > on translating log messages, then I18n team can revert the policy with 
> > > rolling back of translations.
> > > Translated strings are still alive in not only previous stable branches, 
> > > but also in translation memory in Zanata - translation platform.
> > > 
> > > I would like to find some ways to discuss this topic with more community 
> > > wide.
> > 
> > I would suggest that we discuss this at the Forum in Boston, but I think
> > we need to gather some input before then because if there is a consensus
> > that log translations are not useful we can allow the code cleanup to
> > occur and not take up face-to-face time.
> 
> I've started a thread on the operators mailing list [1].
> 
> Doug
> 
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2017-March/012887.html
> 

Based on the feedback on that list, there seems to be no real support
for maintaining the ability to translate log messages. I therefore
recommend that teams accept the patches to remove them, and stop
enforcing their use. Whether or not teams want to make a concerted
effort to sweep through the code and delete them is up to them.

Please keep translations for exceptions and other user-facing messages,
for now.

As Sean pointed out elsewhere, we can deal with other log-related
changes independently, since those are likely to need more thought to
write and review.

Doug