Can the gimp-help-2 module be maintained using Damned-Lies?

Hi,
I want to ask if we can use damned-lies on http://l10n.gnome.org/ to help maintain the translations of gimp-help-2? It can provide a better UI for the gnome translation teams to maintain it as a common module.
I've asked the author of damned-lies, he said if we want to use it, he could adapt it to fit our needs.

Regards,
Aron

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:30:20PM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> Hi,
> I want to ask if we can use damned-lies on http://l10n.gnome.org/ to
> help maintain the translations of gimp-help-2? It can provide a better
> UI for the gnome translation teams to maintain it as a common module.
> I've asked the author of damned-lies, he said if we want to use it, he
> could adapt it to fit our needs.
Good question. I haven't investigated this further, but it would be very
nice if we could hook up with that.

That are currently my 2cents. If someone volunteers for that to
investigate what we need to change, it'll be more than welcome.

Cheers,

On Thu, Jun 25 03:34:40 PDT 2009, Roman Joost wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:30:20PM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I want to ask if we can use damned-lies on http://l10n.gnome.org/ to
> > help maintain the translations of gimp-help-2? It can provide a better
> > UI for the gnome translation teams to maintain it as a common module.
> > I've asked the author of damned-lies, he said if we want to use it, he
> > could adapt it to fit our needs.
> Good question. I haven't investigated this further, but it would be very
> nice if we could hook up with that.
>
> That are currently my 2cents. If someone volunteers for that to
> investigate what we need to change, it'll be more than welcome.

Hi,
Even if i cannot pretend to be the author of damned-lies, I'm the
current maintainer. Thanks Aron for initiating contacts.

I checked the build system of gimp-help-2, wow... :-) Nice work.

I tried to see if it is possible to include the stats on l10n.gnome.org
with minimal changes in both sides. With some minor adaptations, I could
make it work as is. One of the current shortcomings is that we are using
your Makefile only to generate pot files, but not to merge pot with po,
hence not supporting the Compendium functionality.

Now I think the technical side is only one part of the question. The
other part is the translators community stuff. I don't know Gimp help
translation communities, and if they are close to the GNOME translation
community. As soon as the stats would be published on l10n.gnome.org,
you will probably see translations coming either directly as commits, or
at least through the workflow part of our site.
Is this desired? Does someone see any problem with the merge of existing
communities?

Cheers,

Claude Paroz

Hi Claude,

Claude Paroz (Donnerstag, 25. Juni 2009, 23:21):
> I tried to see if it is possible to include the stats on
> l10n.gnome.org with minimal changes in both sides. With some minor
> adaptations, I could make it work as is. One of the current
> shortcomings is that we are using your Makefile only to generate
> pot files, but not to merge pot with po, hence not supporting the
> Compendium functionality.

Which changes are required on our side? (And which changes on your
side?)

We do not use one or two po files, but a set of 40+ files in several
directories (and probably a non-standard naming scheme) - is this a
problem?

Would it be possible to use some of our tools for building pot or po
files (e.g. a patched version of xml2po)?

(Using a compendium is a nice feature, but it's not important or
necessary.)

> Now I think the technical side is only one part of the question.
> The other part is the translators community stuff. I don't know
> Gimp help translation communities, and if they are close to the
> GNOME translation community.

The GIMP help translation community? Oh god, the number of translators
is extremely small - one or two poor volunteers per language spending
a little bit of their time...

> As soon as the stats would be
> published on l10n.gnome.org, you will probably see translations
> coming either directly as commits, or at least through the workflow
> part of our site.
> Is this desired? Does someone see any problem with the merge of
> existing communities?

I don't see a problem - any help would be appreciated! :-)

Thanks for your offer!
Ulf

Le dimanche 28 juin 2009 à 14:45 +0200, Ulf-D. Ehlert a écrit :
> Hi Claude,
>
> Claude Paroz (Donnerstag, 25. Juni 2009, 23:21):
> > I tried to see if it is possible to include the stats on
> > l10n.gnome.org with minimal changes in both sides. With some minor
> > adaptations, I could make it work as is. One of the current
> > shortcomings is that we are using your Makefile only to generate
> > pot files, but not to merge pot with po, hence not supporting the
> > Compendium functionality.
>
> Which changes are required on our side? (And which changes on your
> side?)

I tried the most to not require any change on your side. We'll see if
it's satisfactory. One little change may be a nice-to-have
(DOC_LINGUAS), see below.

> We do not use one or two po files, but a set of 40+ files in several
> directories (and probably a non-standard naming scheme) - is this a
> problem?

Not necessarily. We already have support for multiple po files per
module, it's just that you put it to the limit :-)

> Would it be possible to use some of our tools for building pot or po
> files (e.g. a patched version of xml2po)?

Yes, we're currently using your Makefile.GNU to generate the pot file.
And then we merge ourself to generate updated po files. One rule we have
is to never have to run autogen.sh for generating potfiles, that's why
we prefer using Makefile.GNU rather than Makefile.am.
Paradoxically, gnome-doc-utils standard is to put a DOC_LINGUAS variable
in a Makefile.am file, to specify languages to consider for building
docs. Would it be possible for you to have such a DOC_LINGUAS variable
with the list of current languages? (no *sh expansion please).
However, this is not critical, if you don't change anything, you'll just
have to live with a warning for each template.

Is your patch to xml2po worth going upstream? If yes, did you already
report it in gnome-doc-utils bugzilla?

> (Using a compendium is a nice feature, but it's not important or
> necessary.)
>
> > Now I think the technical side is only one part of the question.
> > The other part is the translators community stuff. I don't know
> > Gimp help translation communities, and if they are close to the
> > GNOME translation community.
>
> The GIMP help translation community? Oh god, the number of translators
> is extremely small - one or two poor volunteers per language spending
> a little bit of their time...
>
> > As soon as the stats would be
> > published on l10n.gnome.org, you will probably see translations
> > coming either directly as commits, or at least through the workflow
> > part of our site.
> > Is this desired? Does someone see any problem with the merge of
> > existing communities?
>
> I don't see a problem - any help would be appreciated! :-)

OK, I set up an experimental module for this on our site with 4 po
files.
http://l10n.gnome.org/module/gimp-help-2/

If it suits you, I'll add the 36 remaining po references to the same
page.

The next step would be to make the images stuff work with your
particular directory setup. See for example:
http://l10n.gnome.org/module/eog/help/master/de/images/

I guess this would require some more ad-hoc handling on our side.

Claude

Claude Paroz (Freitag, 3. Juli 2009, 23:28):
> > We do not use one or two po files, but a set of 40+ files in
> > several directories (and probably a non-standard naming scheme) -
> > is this a problem?
>
> Not necessarily. We already have support for multiple po files per
> module, it's just that you put it to the limit :-)

What's the maximal number of po files?

> Paradoxically, gnome-doc-utils standard is to put a DOC_LINGUAS
> variable in a Makefile.am file, to specify languages to consider
> for building docs. Would it be possible for you to have such a
> DOC_LINGUAS variable with the list of current languages? (no *sh
> expansion please). However, this is not critical, if you don't
> change anything, you'll just have to live with a warning for each
> template.

The build system is still "work in progress", so there is no problem
adding or renaming variables (and more).

Is
DOC_LINGUAS = $(YET_ANOTHER_VARIABLE)
ok?
("*sh expansion" = backticks or $(shell ...)?)

> Is your patch to xml2po worth going upstream? If yes, did you
> already report it in gnome-doc-utils bugzilla?

We filed a bug report (a long time ago) and provided a patch, but
didn't get any feedback.
The patched version reduces the number of placeholder tags generated
by the xml2po script (and thus is not backward compatible), so I
don't know if the author/maintainer will like it...

> The next step would be to make the images stuff work with your
> particular directory setup. See for example:
> http://l10n.gnome.org/module/eog/help/master/de/images/
>
> I guess this would require some more ad-hoc handling on our side.

We are free to change our directory structure, so just ask if there
are some problems you can't solve on your side.

Ulf