[OpenStack-I18n] [openstack-dev] [Cinder] string freeze exception for VMAX driver

Sean McGinnis sean.mcginnis at gmx.com
Fri Aug 4 20:41:05 UTC 2017

On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 02:52:57AM +0900, Ian Y. Choi wrote:
> Hello Sean,
> For soft string freezes as a translator's view, trying the way you suggested
> for server projects would be good assuming that:
> - The volume of changes (e.g., the number of sentences, ratio of changes)
> needs to be properly limited

Completely agree. I'm more interested in changing the process around this than
the policy. I would hope we would never get beyond the single digits in number
of string changes during soft string freeze. If that happens, we are likely
letting too many trivial things through than we should at this point.

> - The string change needs to be well notified to translators (e.g., sharing
> to openstack-i18n mailing list)

I'm not sure how many folks are on the openstack-i18n mailing list. As the
mail manager informed me shortly after sending my last reply, I am not so my
copy to that list was rejected. It might be better to keep it on -dev.

Although we are really trying to get the attention of the i18n team. Maybe
we could make it a requirement that each project's PTL (or designated i18n
liason) be subscribed to that mailing list in order to submit the notice of
string changes allowed during soft freeze.

> - It would be so nice if I18n team can keep track of original string changes
> in Zanata - translate.openstack.org but
>   currently it is not easy unfortunately.
> For hard string freezes, in my honest opinion, it is difficult to change the
> current policy
> because some translation sync support activities for a stable branch in
> openstack-infra [1] and
> addition of a stable version in translate.openstack.org [2] are dealt.

Totally agree. Hard freeze should be a hard freeze. Only if there is a last
minute critical fix that absolutely must get through would be the only reason
I would want to see string changes allowed. And that better be a very rare

> From those views, I would like to discuss more opinions and would we try
> better approach from the next development cycle
> with agreement for server projects?
> With many thanks,
> /Ian
> [1]
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/435812/1/jenkins/jobs/projects.yaml@1146
> [2] https://translate.openstack.org/iteration/view/cinder/stable-ocata

More information about the OpenStack-I18n mailing list