Paul Menzel scrisse: > [mega-cut] > So here is the reason of this message. How do translation teams of > other languages handle this? Are there solutions using SCM or was that > abandoned because it did not prove beneficial? We discussed it some time ago in the general Italian (not-stricly-debian) ML. And we came to the conclusion that using a (D)VCS could be more a pain than a gain. In particular, we follow a scheme very similar to the one you described, and about this change we noted that: * it could pose an important entry barrier: we have many translators which aren't developers, so not familiar with this kind of tools. We are also always lacking manpower, so we'd fear to scary newcomers. * we privilege discussion more than automatic patch-handling: we are still building-up a shared glossary, trying to uniform translations among project and many terms in Italian just doesn't exists (as-is). So we usually have medium-long thread for each review, with open discussion among us. This part is commonly larger than typo-fixing, which are usually already handled on translator's side. We's fear that a (D)CVS could move the focus from that part to just personal commits, degrading the overall quality. This are quite circumstanced problems, which may not apply to your team. In the end, yes, I think a D(VCS) with some clever post-hooks could certainly help the work, integrating the current workflow, but only if your team is an crowded and well-oiled one and the advanced/newcomers ratio is quite high. > Thanks a lot, > Paul Ciao, Luca -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Luca Bruno (kaeso) : :' : The Universal O.S. | lucab (AT) debian.org `. `'` | GPG Key ID: 3BFB9FB3 `- http://www.debian.org | Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Attachment:
pgpop9ncqkv1A.pgp
Description: PGP signature