Open Stack

Well I just checked and no there are no diff on this list but I still do not have any words translated. 
What needs to be done to have this fixed?

Remo 
> On May 15, 2016, at 10:55, Ian Y. Choi <ianyrchoi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Remo!
> 
> Your translation count on Stackalytics is zero?
> If then, I think [1] and [2] will help to solve your problem :)
> 
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/087537.html <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/087537.html>
> [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/087659.html <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/087659.html>
> 
> 
> With many thanks,
> 
> /Ian
> 
> Remo Mattei wrote on 5/16/2016 2:22 AM:
>> The last 2 months I translated about 400 words but stack does not even show any. It will be great to get this fixed.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Inviato da iPhone
>> 
>>> Il giorno 15 mag 2016, alle ore 09:56, Ian Y. Choi <ianyrchoi at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I might have found the problem.
>>> 
>>> The problem is that there can be several 'Translated' results within a week,
>>> however, those results are saved with the same primary key.
>>> 
>>> I have just proposed https://review.openstack.org/316460 .
>>> 
>>> I am not sure whether 'date' field is used on other Stackalytics sources,
>>> but at least, generating the primary key for translation records on record_processor.py
>>> does not use 'savedDate' field, as Shengjing mentioned.
>>> If 'date' field is used on other Stackalytics sources, please tell me, then I will change the review :)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> With many thanks,
>>> 
>>> /Ian
>>> 
>>> 
>>> SJ Zhu wrote on 5/16/2016 12:14 AM:
>>>>> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Ian Y. Choi <ianyrchoi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have a question, although it is not mainly related to wrong Stackalytics
>>>>> stats.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have found that API 'stats/user/%s/%s..%s'
>>>>> and API 'stats/project/%s/version/%s/contributor/%s/%s..%s' generate
>>>>> different results.
>>>>> 
>>>>> For example, from Apr 1 2016 to today, my count is 34320 with the first API,
>>>>> but the send API generates 29490 for the same period.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I do know why the two APIs generate different numbers.
>>>>> Can statistics numbers on user API and the sum of results from each project
>>>>> API be different?
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Previously Stackalytics uses API
>>>> 'stats/project/%s/version/%s/contributor/%s/%s..%s'.
>>>> But I change it to 'stats/user/%s/%s..%s' in
>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/288871/
>>>> 
>>>> I may find the BUG but I have no time to fix it these days. So I hope
>>>> someone to help.
>>>> 
>>>> Stackalytics will get the results every week. And
>>>> 'stats/user/%s/%s..%s' will return
>>>> everyday's count. However Stackalytics seems not to sum a week's work.
>>>> 
>>>> To fix it, I think we can change the way how Stackalytics uses
>>>> Zanata's API. Based on
>>>> 'stats/user/%s/%s..%s' we can get 'savedDate'. So just use the
>>>> 'savedDate' to display
>>>> on Stackalytics. I haven't read the code carefully but I think the
>>>> change is possible.
>>>> What's more we can debug the wrong results on Stackalytics more conveniently.
>>>> 
>>>> But there's another question. How can we fix the old results on Stackalytics?
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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 <mailto:OpenStack-I18n at lists.openstack.org>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n>
> 
> !DSPAM:5738b8456031016916443!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-i18n/attachments/20160515/ad6f345b/attachment-0001.html>