andr55 at laposte.net
Mon Oct 25 18:20:31 CEST 2010
Michael Scherer a écrit :
> Le dimanche 24 octobre 2010 à 09:21 +0200, Wolfgang Bornath a écrit :
>> 2. What can we do to improve the package description in the
>> "Individual package selection during system installation? Most
>> descriptions there only say "Important" or "Comfortable" or some other
>> nonsense like that. I really wonder who on earth had that idea!
>> We need descriptions of the package, what it does. The description
>> should be available for translation, so that according to the set
>> language the user sees the package description in his language.
> Yup, but that's not trivial, from a technical point of view.
> Rpm allow to have translation in spec file, but that's not .po, that's
> more "let's translators edit the source code directly", which is
> unintegrated with translators tools, do not take care of fuzzy string
> and may break software build due to subtilities in specs ( like the
> usage of % for macros, etc ).
> More ever, everything will appear in the packages indexes, which mean :
> - more memory used for all installation
> - bigger indexes to download
> - longer time to load from disk, which mean longer rpmdrake startup
> - less space on cd and or dvd.
> So we need to find a better way.
> Better in two points :
> - better way to distribute it
> - better way to translate it
> The distribution part is IMHO the easiest now we have the control of the
> main mirror. We can just split the hdlist in 2, one for the description,
> for each languages, one for the metadata, and let urpmi/whatever combine
> this into a regular hdlist and use this. We can even maybe find a way
> that will not break smart and others.
> The translation part is more tricky, we tried in the past with the
> CVS-po project, but it didn't work, maybe someone who as around that
> time could tell us. Anne know for sure, Wolfgang is likely to know too.
> Basically, the idea was to extract the summary and description from the
> packages indexes, and then convert this as .po file. There is a small
> problem however. If we use .po per package, then it will be hellish for
> translators to open 10000 files ( imho, maybe I am wrong ). If we use
> one .po for repository, then the files are huge and maybe consume too
> much ressources ( even if nowadays, laptops are provided with more
> memory than the server we use at PLF for everything).
> Maybe we can group rpm .po, like 1 file for 100 rpms description, but I
> fear this will bring problem too.
> Then we also have to write a software that goes from .po to hdlist, of
> course, which may e non trivial ( as it requires both intimate knowledge
> about rpm and gettext ).
>> 3. The same is needed in rpmdrake.
>> In other words:
>> We need a way to add descriptions to packages. These descriptions must
>> be available for the installer in "Individual package selecteion" and
>> there must be a way to have .po files for the translators.
>> Is there something which can be done without passing the ball to and
>> fro like a tennis match?
> On the translation side, it is work. On the improve description side, I
> suggest to organize day dedicated to the task, like the bug days. See my
> other mail on the thread about it.
There are some ideas fomenting here ...
What about an online tool, with the descriptions by package, where
anyone (with the appropriate account) can contribute, seeing the current
description, and suggest changes. The packager (or authorised person)
will confirm any changes, so this evolves dynamically.
Translators access the confirmed description on line, and similarly make
changes for their language, with a similar confirmation process.
Any changes to the base description are automatically signalled for
During the cauldron period, maybe the translations are not necessarily
included, but for release time (at least), the base description and
confirmed translations are automatically included in the package, by
whatever tool is necessary.
1) By having the description changes and translations made online, they
are easier to implement in a timely manner.
2) There should be a way of doing it offline and posting changes online
3) I don't know what software would be appropriate, but LibreOffice is
thinking of using Pootle, which seems to be appropriate from their
See : http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/pootle/index
and : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pootle
If we get something like this implemented, it will be a big improvement
over Mandriva, and probably most other distros. Which should in turn
lead to their improvement as well.
my 2 cents :)
More information about the Mageia-discuss