Re: [Amsn-devel] CVS access for the translation team

[Hatredman <hen...@te...>]

Before continuing I'd like Alvaro to share his opinion about the subject, a=
s=20
it was his Idea to have more than one person in charge of this.

Historiadores acreditam que,=20
em Qui 30 Jun 2005 10:00, Youness Alaoui disse:
> Hi,
> I removed him, because his only task was as a translation manager, and you
> already do the job.=20

I was doing this alone until december. After that Alvaro and I decided that=
 it=20
was better if we had a team of five commiters to achieve a faster response=
=20
for translators. We have roughly 4 translators for each language, and a tot=
al=20
of 51 languages supported (number growing each month), which takes the=20
estimated number of translators to more than 200. Not an impressive number,=
=20
but difficult to deal with if you are by yourself. I was choking, so I need=
ed=20
help.

So we formed a team of 4 "translation managers" (five if you include Alvaro=
)=20
to make things work faster. This team includes:

        =C1lvaro J. Iradier
        Cheng-Lin Yang
        Henrique Cesar Ulbrich (Hatredman)
        Pavel V=E1vra
        Thomas Geirhovd

And all of them worked hard. No one is disposable by now, we have at least=
=20
four new languages in the oven and most of the existing 51 are being active=
ly=20
worked on. If we don't have a fast response there is a high risk of two=20
translators working on the same file without knowing about eacho other. Thi=
s=20
is a common problem (I had it today, two pt_BR translators sent the same fi=
le=20
with three days difference - I was unavailable to do the thing because of=20
personal problems and all other commiters were removed).

Anyway, I discovered today that you seem to have removed me also, so we hav=
e=20
no one to do the task. There are 9 (nine) langfiles waiting on the line and=
=20
nobody can commit them (including me) because we have no permissions.

> I think only one translation manager is more than=20
> enough. If a translation needs to be commited, I suggest he forwards it to
> you and you do it.

That's how things work. The 200+ translators forward the translated files t=
o=20
ams...@li... and one of us five (whoever is available)=20
commit the files.

I guess you have enough decision power inside the aMSN project to decide th=
is=20
in spite of what others think, but you could at least have asked!

In MY opinion (and I'm sure in Alvaro's also) it is better to get back to t=
hat=20
5-person-lang-commit schema.

> Unless there's a real need for him to have an account (like being an
> active developper), then I may reconsider adding him, but if not, I'd like
> to keep the team members as minimal as possible.

So I think it is time to create another branch to acomodate *ONLY* the lang=
=20
and doc files. I can be responsible for that and this way I can decide=20
whoevers has CVS access for that branch and whoever has not.

> I'm sorry if it bothers some of you, but I think it's alot better this
> way. I gave the same answer to Thomas Geirhovd. If you assume he already
> contributed to the project in a certain manner, you may add his name to
> the end of the CREDITS file.

He is. He contributed a LOT, so he is credited as a Translation Management=
=20
Team Member as well as his language's team.

> Thank you for your understanding.

I can say the same ;-)

In short: the whole team is important. I am asking you to grant access to t=
hem=20
all again (including me). If you don't agree with that I think we should=20
discuss it further. If you *REALLY* disagree with that maybe it is time to=
=20
create a separate CVS branch.

Cheers
=2D-=20
Hatredman
hat...@us...
We've always had him!
http://www.ericblumrich.com/thanks.html