[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n-doc
Subject:    Re: [RFC][IMPORTANT] Removing kdeqt.po
From:       Burkhard =?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCck?= <lueck () hube-lueck ! de>
Date:       2010-08-14 16:39:00
Message-ID: 201008141839.00833.lueck () hube-lueck ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, um 00:02:58 schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
> Hi, since some time Qt allows for translations to be contributed to Qt
> upstream, so i'd like to suggest us stopping to translate Qt (kdeqt.po)
> locally and people contributing translations to the correct place (Qt
> proper).
> 
> Contributing Qt translations upstream will mean:
>  * Qt but non KDE programs will also use your translations too, making your
> contribution more useful (good)
>  * Translations will be synced with Qt releases instead with KDE releases
> as they should be (good)
>  * You will use a different tools and format (linguist, .ts) (bad?)
>  * You will have to give Nokia the right to license the translations under
> a non free license (bad?)
> 
> So i'd like to ask for comments about what you think if working on the
> technical solution to allow Qt translations to be used (isntead of kdeqt.po
> ones) is worth or even if there are some good sides to it you don't want
> the removal of kdeqt.po to happen.
> 
In general I agree that it is better to translate Qt upstream, but I have some 
concerns:

* Higher barrier (another translation tool or convert/reconvert of the 
catalogs, another account, another source control system)

* No automatical notifications of new/fuzzy messages any more

That may be no problem for bigger teams, but for smaler ones?

In the current system we control the translation (team style, consistency with 
translation of kde apps, commit ourselves), translating upstream we relay on a 
third party accepting/committing our merge requests.

I'd like to hear some comments from people abiut their experience with merge 
requests, 

My general impression is that i18n and translations have a lower priority in 
Qt than in KDE.

Thanks.

-- 
Burkhard Lück

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]