Open Stack

>
> And one more idea: although some previous translators are not regarded as
> ATC, I think it would be much better
> to mention their Transifex ID (at least) to acknowledge their previous
> contribution or credit on somewhere, such as OpenStack wiki.


Agree with this point, it would be very useful if there's history of the
statistics with their Transifex ID attached.
@Daisy, does openstack keep the history of statistics everytime its
compiled?

---------------------------------------------

Alex Eng
Globalisation Tools Engineering
DID: +61 3514 8262 <callto:+61+3514+8262>
Mobile: +614 2335 3457 <callto:+614+2335+3457>

Red Hat, Asia-Pacific Pty Ltd
Level 1, 193 North Quay
Brisbane 4000
Office: +61 7 3514 8100 <callto:+61+7+3514+8100>
Fax: +61 7 3514 8199 <callto:+61+7+3514+8199>
Website: www.redhat.com

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Ian Y. Choi <ianyrchoi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Daisy,
>
> Thank you so much for your kind explanation.
>
> I agree that all of translation data are successfully moved to Zanata,
> and I have no objection to remove current Transifex not to be confused for
> OpenStack translation contributor candidates.
>
> I just worried that some guys might want to see previous Transifex
> history: who contributed
> to OpenStack translations later, since, the author of translation results
> from Transifex
> to Zanata is "OpenStack Infra", not actual translators, as far as I know.
> However, I also think that it is very difficult to keep all the history to
> public.
>
> For my OpenStack translation stuff, I do not need Transifex any more.
> So if other translators also do not need to see to track previous
> translators in Transifex, then
> there is no more additional reason to remove Transifex except querying
> statistics.
>
> And one more idea: although some previous translators are not regarded as
> ATC, I think it would be much better
> to mention their Transifex ID (at least) to acknowledge their previous
> contribution or credit on somewhere, such as OpenStack wiki.
>
> Let's discuss on today IRC meeting :)
>
>
> With many thanks,
>
> /Ian
>
> Ying Chun Guo wrote on 12/17/2015 2:39 PM:
>
>>
>> Ian Y,
>>
>> I will not use the official i18n repo to store those materials.
>> I plan to store it in a personal repo in github,
>> just to keep the history.
>>
>> We have moved all data into Zanata while we migrated to Zanata in
>> September.
>> 4 months passed, we didn't get any complains about any missing data.
>> We could be sure that all data have been moved to the new tool.
>> So it's not that necessary to back up.
>>
>> The only reason to support to not delete OpenStack from Transifex is that:
>> it's easy to query the contribution data in any certain period through
>> the web UI of Transifex.
>> If we remove OpenStack from Transifex, we will lost the ability to query.
>> I could export the contribution data for a certain period, for example,
>> the last 3 years, from Transifex,
>> and store the export data somewhere.
>> But I will lost the ability to query any periods, for example, the data
>> from 2015.4-2015.10 will not be able to get.
>>
>> So we could discuss whether we need this ability in the meeting today.
>> If we don't need, Transifex is no use for us. We could delete it safely.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>>
>>
>> "Ian Y. Choi" <ianyrchoi at gmail.com> wrote on 2015/12/17 12:21:34:
>>
>> > From: "Ian Y. Choi" <ianyrchoi at gmail.com>
>> > To: Ying Chun Guo/China/IBM at IBMCN, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com>
>> > Cc: Robert Simai <robert.simai at suse.com>,
>> openstack-i18n at lists.openstack.org
>> > Date: 2015/12/17 12:22
>> > Subject: Re: [Openstack-i18n] Transifex
>> >
>> > Hello Andreas,
>> >
>> > I am copying & pasting from Andreas's comment to this thread:
>> >
>> > +++
>> > "Sorry, let me clarify this again:
>> > * ATC is one year (voting rights for i18n)
>> > * Free passes for OpenStack conference is 6 months
>> >
>> > For ATC, you could take a one time snapshot as well now - going back
>> > to 1st of April, instead of saving it for later,"
>> >
>> >
>> > => Thank you so much for your nice clarification on ATC status and
>> > summit free passes.
>> >
>> > We would vote this issue (removing on Transifex site) on today's IRC
>> > meeting, and yes.
>> > We need contribution statistics data from Transifex, and I agree that
>> > we can query and save Transifex statistics data (from April 1 2015
>> > to now) and later
>> > we would merge this data with Zanata statistics data on next April.
>> >
>> > And I am not sure exactly, but we might use openstack/i18n repo to
>> > store Transfex related data
>> > into a specific branch, not a master branch.
>> >
>> >
>> > With many thanks,
>> >
>> > /Ian
>> >
>> >
>> > Ying Chun Guo wrote on 12/17/2015 1:21 AM:
>> > If we don't need the contribution data in Transifex, I think we
>> > could remove it.
>> >
>> > As to the back up, it's a personal habit. I just want to keep it as
>> > the history.
>> > I will use a repo in github to store the documents, including an
>> > Excel file with the contribution statistic data.
>> >
>> > Best regards
>> > Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com> wrote: -----
>> >
>> > >To: "Ian Y. Choi" <ianyrchoi at gmail.com>, Robert Simai
>> > ><robert.simai at suse.com>
>> > >From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com>
>> > >Date: 12/16/2015 09:59PM
>> > >Cc: openstack-i18n at lists.openstack.org
>> > >Subject: Re: [Openstack-i18n] Transifex
>> > >
>> > >On 2015-12-16 14:45, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> > >> On 2015-12-16 14:34, Ian Y. Choi wrote:
>> > >>> Hello Robert,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> As far as I remember, on the last i18n irc meeting (Dec 03 2015 +6
>> > >UTC),
>> > >>> we discussed this issue.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> During the meeting, meeting attendees found that querying to
>> > >Transifex
>> > >>> statistics data
>> > >>> is needed to check ATC status for the next OpenStack release,
>> > >Mitaka.
>> > >>
>> > >> ATC status is handed out only for people active in the current
>> > >release,
>> > >> so for the next summit in Austin, only for people that were active
>> > >in
>> > >> Mitaka time frame. And since we used Zanata for all of Mitaka,
>> > >there's
>> > >> no need to query transifex IMO.
>> > >>
>> > >> Katamo is wrong with ATC status for one year, this has changed,
>> > >
>> > >See
>> > >https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/45531/atc-pass-for-the-openstac
>> > >k-summit/
>> > >with information for Tokyo summit (1st of April was cut-off-date),
>> > >
>> > >Andreas
>> > >--
>> > > Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi
>> > > SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
>> > > GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
>> > > HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
>> > > GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272
>> > >A126
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >_______________________________________________
>> > >Openstack-i18n mailing list
>> > >Openstack-i18n at lists.openstack.org
>> > >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openstack-i18n mailing list
> Openstack-i18n at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-i18n/attachments/20151218/f9861a9f/attachment.html>