FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-23-2010, 05:53 AM
Julien Valroff
 
Default Translations copyrights/licences

Hi,

I am working on packaging pino [0] for which I own the ITP [1].

The sources contain gettext translations, the copyrights and licences of
which are sometimes unclearly stated, eg:

# Arabic translation for pino package.
# Copyright (C) 2009 the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
# This file is distributed under the same license as the pino package.
# MaXeR <mmaxer@gmail.com>, 2009.

or

# translation of pino.ui.pino.po to Bengali INDIA
# sankarshan mukhopadhyay <sankarshan@fedoraproject.org>, 2010.
# Runa Bhattacharjee <runab@redhat.com>, 2010.
# Copyright (C) YEAR THE PACKAGE'S COPYRIGHT HOLDER
# This file is distributed under the same license as the PACKAGE package.

Sometimes, the name of the last translator isn't even stated.

I will obviously contact upstream so that they contact the translators
and ask them to fix this, but I guess this will take some time and I
would like to be able to get pino uploaded soon.

How to deal with such unclear/incomplete headers?

In the case the copyright is "given" to the pino developers, wouldn't it
be good to state the name of the last translator(s) in the copyright
file? If so, is an X-Last-Translator field appropriate in the machine
readable copyright format [2]?

Cheers,
Julien

[0] http://code.google.com/p/pino-twitter/
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=573040
[2] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/

--
Julien Valroff <julien@kirya.net>
http://www.kirya.net
GPG key: 4096R/290D20C5
092F 4CB5 5F19 E006 1CFD B489 D32B 8D66 290D 20C5
 
Old 05-23-2010, 08:01 AM
Neil Williams
 
Default Translations copyrights/licences

On Sun, 23 May 2010 07:53:14 +0200
Julien Valroff <julien@kirya.net> wrote:

> The sources contain gettext translations, the copyrights and licences
> of which are sometimes unclearly stated, eg:

Nearly all packages with translations have "problems" like this. It
isn't actually a problem, there's nothing realistic that can be done
about it and nearly all packages with translations would have the same
"problem". If we accept that this is an issue, we'll have 14,000 RC
bugs overnight and we'll never release again.

Translators are often transient - a translation can turn up in a
package even with a Last-Translator but no further translations may
ever appear with no replies from the supplied address. Eventually
someone else might take over but a lot of packages have abandoned
translations and no usable details of Last-Translator.

I see no reason to specify these in debian/copyright.

Translator details can change more frequently than the wind and are
distributed under the same license as the package. To me, that's an end
to it.

> Sometimes, the name of the last translator isn't even stated.

s/Sometimes/Frequently/. Even when stated, the given name isn't
contactable anymore, so the prospect of getting anything in the
headers updated is zero. It's hard enough getting the translations
themselves updated.

With po files in top level po/ directories, there may be a
"translator-credits" msgid where the msgstr has a name but there's no
guarantee that this / these names are up to date.

Those details do appear in the UI of such programs, generally, so the
translators have some motivation to put their own names in that list,
so those can be a bit better but still not 100% up to date.

> I will obviously contact upstream so that they contact the translators
> and ask them to fix this, but I guess this will take some time and I
> would like to be able to get pino uploaded soon.

It isn't even possible in most cases. Only a minority of translators
would be able to respond. I don't think you should even contact
upstream - there's likely to be nothing upstream can do about it.

http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/?q=node/32

http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/?q=node/25

If you contacted *me* as upstream, I would refuse. Simple. It isn't
going to happen. You can threaten to remove the package from Debian,
you can threaten to remove all incomplete translations, it won't matter
- there is nothing that can be done because the people are either not
known or not contactable.

> How to deal with such unclear/incomplete headers?

As Debian Maintainer, you don't. Simple.

It's quite enough of a headache for upstream.

> In the case the copyright is "given" to the pino developers, wouldn't
> it be good to state the name of the last translator(s) in the
> copyright file? If so, is an X-Last-Translator field appropriate in
> the machine readable copyright format [2]?

NO!

Very, very, few translations are actively "maintained", despite the
best efforts of upstreams to hold string freezes and contact
translators to request updates. If a package has ~40 translations, only
a handful will be at 100% at any one release. Many translations are
effectively abandoned. Many translators do not complete the headers at
all, most do not keep the headers consistently updated.

It's not just the top level po/ files either, packages have help/po,
doc/po and debian/po and some have po/ as well as po-lib/ or po-bin/
and other subdirectories - expecting all of those to be constantly
updated in debian/copyright is insane!

(Not to mention the packages which have translations that don't use
gettext formats where there might be no declaration of the
translator's details whatsoever.)

Have you any idea how much work this would be for a package like
drivel, gnucash or gedit???

The only "solution" for this "problem" is for every package to drop
90% of translations. Should make the archive a whole lot smaller and
would be really helpful to our users, not.

It is not a problem, forget it and please, do some real work that makes
a release more likely, not less. (If you've got time to waste on this,
you certainly have time to fix some existing RC bugs to help out those
who want to but don't have time to do so.)

--


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
 
Old 05-23-2010, 12:32 PM
Helge Kreutzmann
 
Default Translations copyrights/licences

Hello,
speaking both with my translator and my Debian Maintainer hat on, I
can state the following:

a) There are lots of "drive by" translators. Systems like launchpad or
DDTP even *encourage* this. In this case, it is most likely not
possible at all to contact individual translators.
b) In structured projects (Debian, Fedora, OOo, KDE, GNOME) there are
often language teams. In this case, translations are often
"channeled" via the team. So if you want, you can try to collect
the names in the copyright, but a team adress is more valuable.
c) Licenses are often alien to translators. They focus on the content
and do not fill in the header. I've asked to get at least "same
license as package" filled in, sometimes people respond, sometimes
they don't.
d) I know translators who like to do an initial translation but not
maintenance. So if you want, you could contact the teams from b)
(if they exist) and ask if someone would maintain the translation
or at least provide an update. This is a lot of work, given the
number of languages available. Just watch the efforts for d-i on
this list.

Notwithstanding a close examination of policy I would agree with Neil:
Take what you can get (see a),), hope that some review takes place
(see b)), assume that translators want their content to be distributed
(see c), why else would they invest the time on some "random" web
site) and be happy if updated come in (see d)). Unless there are bug
reports regarding translations I would also agree that fixing (RC)
bugs is more important than trying to "fix" the copyright file with
regard to translations (though I try).

And regarding completeness: Send a call for translations regularly
(e.g. using podebconf-report-po), giving sufficient time for
responses (depending on the size, 10 days is a good time frame), and
then upload. It's simply impossible to get all po files at 100%. (Of
course, having an active upstream relieves you from that).

Greetings

Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann debian@helgefjell.de
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
 
Old 05-25-2010, 04:42 PM
Julien Valroff
 
Default Translations copyrights/licences

Le dimanche 23 mai 2010 à 09:01 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit :
> On Sun, 23 May 2010 07:53:14 +0200
> Julien Valroff <julien@kirya.net> wrote:
>
> > The sources contain gettext translations, the copyrights and licences
> > of which are sometimes unclearly stated, eg:
>
> Nearly all packages with translations have "problems" like this. It
> isn't actually a problem, there's nothing realistic that can be done
> about it and nearly all packages with translations would have the same
> "problem". If we accept that this is an issue, we'll have 14,000 RC
> bugs overnight and we'll never release again.
[...]
>
> I see no reason to specify these in debian/copyright.
[...]
> > How to deal with such unclear/incomplete headers?
>
> As Debian Maintainer, you don't. Simple.

Thanks a lot to you and to Helge for your clear answers.
I will then follow your advise and not consider information for po
files

Cheers,
Julien


--
Julien Valroff <julien@kirya.net>
http://www.kirya.net
GPG key: 4096R/290D20C5
092F 4CB5 5F19 E006 1CFD B489 D32B 8D66 290D 20C5


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1274805771.2652.19.camel@gaia.kirya.net">http://lists.debian.org/1274805771.2652.19.camel@gaia.kirya.net
 
Old 05-25-2010, 05:41 PM
Darren Salt
 
Default Translations copyrights/licences

I demand that Helge Kreutzmann may or may not have written...

> Speaking both with my translator and my Debian Maintainer hat on, I can
> state the following:

> a) There are lots of "drive by" translators. Systems like launchpad or
> DDTP even *encourage* this. In this case, it is most likely not
> possible at all to contact individual translators.

> b) In structured projects (Debian, Fedora, OOo, KDE, GNOME) there are
> often language teams. In this case, translations are often
> "channeled" via the team. So if you want, you can try to collect
> the names in the copyright, but a team adress is more valuable.

To me, this all doesn't matter so long as who changed what is recorded and I
can get (or generate) a series of diffs which I can then commit where
appropriate. If I can't, then I'm not really interested.

[snip]
--
| Darren Salt | linux at youmustbejoking | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| using Debian GNU/Linux | or ds ,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | back!
| + Travel less. Share transport more. PRODUCE LESS CARBON DIOXIDE.

Without fools there would be no wisdom.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 51227C3724%linux@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk">http ://lists.debian.org/51227C3724%linux@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk
 
Old 05-26-2010, 09:15 AM
Helge Kreutzmann
 
Default Translations copyrights/licences

Hello,
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:41:09PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Helge Kreutzmann may or may not have written...
> > Speaking both with my translator and my Debian Maintainer hat on, I can
> > state the following:
>
> > a) There are lots of "drive by" translators. Systems like launchpad or
> > DDTP even *encourage* this. In this case, it is most likely not
> > possible at all to contact individual translators.
>
> > b) In structured projects (Debian, Fedora, OOo, KDE, GNOME) there are
> > often language teams. In this case, translations are often
> > "channeled" via the team. So if you want, you can try to collect
> > the names in the copyright, but a team adress is more valuable.
>
> To me, this all doesn't matter so long as who changed what is recorded and I
> can get (or generate) a series of diffs which I can then commit where
> appropriate. If I can't, then I'm not really interested.

From my experience the workflow is as follows: Either the "Last
Translator" or someone else notices or becomes noticed that a
translation is out of date. She then updates it (or asks on the list
for an update), the translation is reviewed (more or less formally)
and in the end the translation is sent to the package / upstream.
Hopefully the copyright statements in the header are updated, and the
"Last Translator" address is working. If the "Last Translator"
actually was the last translator I'm not always sure, he might be the
language coordinator or the field might simply not be up to date
anymore. The German team takes both license as well as "Last
Translator" seriously. So if you are in doubt, contact the mentioned
translation list (which unfortunately might be out of sync as well).

In essence: Take the translation and the "Last Translator" for your
records as stated. There is not much more you can do if you don't
want to go into the nitty gritty details of each language team.

(I personally ask the submitter, however, if the headers are obviously
wrong, but I don't believe this scales if you happen to have lots of
translations).

Greetings

Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann debian@helgefjell.de
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:22 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org