Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

>> The conversation till now doesn't make it clear whether the proposal
>> is around (1) a separate/independent TWN instance for KDE L10n or, (2)
>> adding the KDE projects into the existing TWN deployment. I had
>> assumed the former.
> 
> It's (2). A separate MediaWiki+Translate instance is of course possible, but
> you would have to set it up on your own and manage it, so I can't imagine why
> you'd want that when TWN staff is so helpful and willing to spend time for you.

But with an external system I see different issues in the light of KDE
Manifesto (http://manifesto.kde.org/). I will report here the relevant part
from the "Principles" section:

================================================
= Technical requirements

  * The project stays true to established practices common to similar KDE
projects unless special considerations force it to deviate
  * Software assets access model
        Direct write access to the software assets is granted only to KDE
contributor accounts
        Direct write access to the software assets is granted to all KDE
contributor accounts
   * Projects that choose not to host their web services on KDE infrastructure
need to provide administrative access to the KDE sysadmin team; or, if such
access cannot be granted, a regular backup of all the code and data used by
the web services should be provided to the KDE sysadmins (except if the
service is not an integral part of the project's workflow, community
interactions and public image) to ensure continued availability
================================================

Regarding access: there is a procedure in place for enabling KDE accounts: all
KDE contributor accounts needs to be approved before starting contributing.

So contributors on translatewiki should be approved before being allowed to
commit to KDE translations, like any other contributor. This means
administrative access for KDE sysadmins to translatewiki.

Also, synchronization should reflect the contributions of the various
developers, so no bulk import, especially given that the information on "who
committed what" are on an external system.

On the other side, there is the need for administrative access (or backups of
all data) for sysadmins.

An internal instance of translatewiki is most likely to be accepted as the
aforementioned points are more likely to be satisfied.

Please note that this problem must be solved before the first automated commit
starts to appear, or it would lead to troubles (I suspect starting with the
suspension of the accounts used for it).

Ciao
-- 
Luigi