[OpenStack-I18n] Planning Barcelona Design Summit session - contributors meetup

Ian Y. Choi ianyrchoi at gmail.com
Mon Oct 17 11:41:18 UTC 2016


Robert Simai wrote on 10/17/2016 5:11 PM:
> On Monday 17 October 2016, 09:52:40 Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com> wrote:
>> On 2016-10-17 09:40, Robert Simai wrote:
>>> On Sunday 16 October 2016, 20:05:39 Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10/16/2016 01:41 PM, Akihiro Motoki wrote:
>>>>> I think some of my added items might be aggressive, but my main point
>>>>> is
>>>>> that the i18n team needs to express more focused areas to reduce
>>>>> confusion around the feature freeze.
>>>>> GUI message translation continuously gathers interest of translations
>>>>> so
>>>>> far.
>>>>> Documentation translation is the next one.
>>>>> How about CLI? How about server project user-visible messages? How
>>>>> about
>>>>> log messages?
>>>>> This is my question.
>>>>> According a rough survey I made in OpenStack Days Tokyo last year (one
>>>>> year and a few months ago),
>>>>> translation interest from the attendees was "Horizon > Documentation
>>>>> CLI >> logging messages".
>>>>> (there were no categories such as release notes and server
>>>>> user-visible
>>>>> messages)
>>>> Still, some translators translate log messages first, since they are
>>>> nice and short ;(
>>>> We can give translators more guidance on what to translate - or we can
>>>> go one step further and disable some translations completely. Right now
>>> No, please don't!
>>>> if a project wants translation sync and sends a patch for
>>>> project-config, it goes in. But does it make sense with current team to
>>>> translate over 80 projects? Or should we instead tell projects: This is
>>>> what we focus on, therefore let's only put these documents in Zanata -
>>>> and nothing else?
>>> To set the focus is fine - as already suggested, there could be pointers
>>> on the Zanata start page - but I don't see a reason to disallow lesser
>>> important translations. This will even block some language teams where
>>> the more relevant projects are already complete.
>> Sure, we shouldn't be in such a situation.
>> I'm asking myself whether there's a middle ground - 82 projects with
>> release notes and log files is a lot. How many do we cover (for the best
>> language, for the best 3,...) today?
>> What shall we do once the next 10 projects want to have translations?
>> Or what can we do to get more translations for those projects that we
>> consider important?
> It seems atm. it's up to the language teams to evaluate their status, to
> engage or find additional resources. Probably it's a bigger task to create,
> but can we have some report/visualization of where we are from different
> POVs? Start by language, by project, by category (UI, app, log), by
> importance ..., with options to drill down or combine these.
But the price of durable and reliable ATM would be high? :)

I agree that I18n as a team needs to encourage translations into various 
OpenStack projects, rather than limit translation contribution.
I think Andreas's mentioning is related to whether we should aware of 
all of OpenStack projects with releases or not, rather than
disabling translations for projects in Zanata.
In my opinion, all master branches on every OpenStack project as much as 
possible would be better to more engage in, as Robert mentioned.
However, release-awareness for translation would have different 
perspective. For example, I have seen that OpenStack infrastructure and 
release team members
were very busy when release date is upcoming: such as soft freeze, hard 
freeze, and so on.
I do not want them to be hurt with numerous log messages, and some of 
them are also kind translators.

Also, since we are one team, discussion on which projects in one 
language team is interested or not interested,
how another language team encourages translation in its local user 
group, what would be nice translation tips, and so on
will make good synergy. So I think discussing translation plan and 
priority is one of very important to-do things instead of just opening
all the projects. Moreover, some translators would have special 
interests on a specific project. I do not want to block them,
but since the priority would be less than what we set overall plan and 
priority, I would like to see high priority projects first and investigate
on i18n things including infrastructure and release cycle for lower 
priority projects.

And another idea: a survey to all language coordinators and/or 
translators for their interested translation target projects and/or 
priority would be good.
I will bring this as one topic in upcoming IRC meeting (Oct 20 07:00 UTC).

> I think there will be more interest if the missing bits and pieces can be
> highlighted and preferably have links to the translation files in Zanata, to
> make it as easy as possible to engage and fill the gaps.
Yep. Such enhancement is really needed! Hope that Zanata version will be 
upgrade soon.

By the way, I briefly modified the Zanata front page: 
(Also it would be great that front page visibility will be enhanced, as 
I wrote in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/I18n-Zanata-enhancement )
If you have better idea on front page design and content, please tell me :)

With many thanks,


More information about the OpenStack-I18n mailing list