[Etoys] etoys & Pootle (Re: Swedish translations for etoys)

Korakurider korakurider at gmail.com
Mon Jan 28 04:36:17 EST 2008

On 1/28/08, Takashi Yamamiya <tak at metatoys.org> wrote:
> Hi Korakurider,
> This is current work flow of etoys translation which I assume.
> - A developer modifies translation keywords.
> - New POT is updated in svn repository.
> - New POT is copied to git (mkPootle).
> - Pootle merges new POT automatically.
> - A translator translates new keywords introduced by new POT.
> - A translator checks fuzzy keywords modified by new POT.
> - A language admin commits translation.
> - POs are updated in git repository.
> - POs are copied to svn (mkPootle), and MOs are built (Makefile).
    I understand this and basically I don't change this basically.

> On Jan 26, 2008 11:01 AM, Korakurider <korakurider at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, Sayamindu and Takashi.
> >
> >    And, Takashi, it seems we are in confusion right now:
> >       POs on git are synchronized to older POT recently. see (2)
> >       Import from Pootle failed this time. see (5)
> Yes, when I updated the repository, Pootle didn't merge new POT
> yet. but those are most up to date translations. Please don't worry
> about the header too much.
    I used headers to show what were changed in each files, what are
out of sync.

    What I am worrying is the fact translators are working with POs
based on old POT, and we leave it as is.  It would not be big problem
if the differences among POT versions are just additions of new
phrases. But until now we don't refrain from changing existing
phrases, right?   Contributed translations for old wording will not be
used in final product, so I think this is problem.
I know phrases for the case aren't many and may be I am worring too
much.  But I don't think it too much if we aren't taking care of this
very well.

(note that other product declare "string freeze" for specific release
to stabilize translation, but we haven't.  And some products have even
effort to diagnose changes to existing wording automaticaly  )

> > > You can ask me to schedule a git push (manually for all changed po
> > > files) when you do a sync at your end. Do you want something like that
> > > ?
> >
> >     I believe we need the way for developers to pull latest
> > translations from Pootle to repository (or asking you to do it :-) .
> > Pushing periodically would even make sense for etoys as we spitted
> > repository into git for translators and svn for developers.
> > But the decision up to Takashi (and etoys core developers).
> I don't quite understand why you need latest translations on
> Pootle. It could be inconsistent. Let's try the standard work flow of
> Pootle at first.
    Hmm, I thought we want use as much contributions by translators as
possible on building newer RPM, right?  For this standard process will
work only if language admin push translations on the right timing.  I
don't quite understand why you want to lose control on this.  But the
process is up to you anyway and I would give up if you insist that...

> > As a side note:
> > With a sole Pootle, users can't know what has changed in translations
> > /review or when POT merge was done, right?  Me thinks these
> > capabilities are very important to run and manage translation project.
> >  By synchronizing Pootle and repository more tightly, tracking would
> > be easier...
> In theory, if you use Quick Translate mode, you can trace new /
> modified keywords introduced by new POT. But it doesn't work well in
> etoys because there are too much untranslated keywords. I think we
> should reduce the size of POT as much as possible.
   Even languages with long history of translation effort(Spanish or
Japanese for instances) have about 50% of phrases translated, while
they think it good coverage for typical usage in workshop for kids.
So I am curious what do you mean when you are saying to shrink POT.
(How much coverage number do we want actually, etc)

> > > Regarding POT merging, unfortunately I have not been able to this till
> > > now - since it looks the PO files are too large for normal Pootle to
> > > handle (the merge command took 100% CPU on the dual Opteron server for
> > > 20 minutes before I killed it). I have spoken to the developers of
> > > Pootle, and they suggested some optimizations which can be done
> > > (certain extra Python modules need to be installed in the server) to
> > > speed up the process. I'm trying to coordinate with the server admins
> > > to do this. If nothing works out by the end of this week - I'll use
> > > msgmerge manually from the command line to update the PO files.
> Maybe I have to learn python to help Pootle developers...
    see the recent discussion on Pootle list Sayamindu mentioned,
    insight on this was explained.


More information about the Etoys mailing list