Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Hello,

once again Rosetta makes a very bad image: The translations for Intrepid
have been opened quite late (after feature freeze). A lot of upstream
translations are missing. In the case of KDE it is a total desaster:
E.g. the upstream translation of konqueror is nearly 100% in Kubuntu
only ~ 50%. The corresponding upstream team is more than disappointed.

http://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/trunk-kde4/team/de/kdebase/

https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/kdebase/+pots/konqueror

Do all Intrepid packages need to be re-uploaded to extract the upstream
translations? The German translation are not in the import queue.

If the above is the case: We cannot expect that every package will be
uploaded again until the release. Do you have got any plans?

Regards,

Sebastian
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Le Saturday 13 September 2008 21:45:27 Sebastian Heinlein, vous avez écrit :
> Hello,

Hi,

> once again Rosetta makes a very bad image: The translations for Intrepid
> have been opened quite late (after feature freeze). A lot of upstream
> translations are missing. In the case of KDE it is a total desaster:
> E.g. the upstream translation of konqueror is nearly 100% in Kubuntu
> only ~ 50%. The corresponding upstream team is more than disappointed.
>
> http://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/trunk-kde4/team/de/kdebase/
>
> https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/kdebase/+po
>ts/konqueror

This is the same for the French translations. Kde upstream team has made a
huge work to have a about 100% translated :

http://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/stable-kde4/team/fr/

and other l10n teams as well : http://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/stable-
kde4/toplist/

But Rosettta doesn't reflect this. It seems that there"s a terrible mix-up with
KDE 3.5 packages: old templates are still present and new Kde4 templates are
missing (e.g. dolphin.po). It's obvious if you compare kdebase templates in
rosettta : https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/kdebase
with upstream http://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/stable-kde4/team/fr/kdebase/


--
Bruno

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Sebastian Heinlein [2008-09-13 21:45 +0200]:
> once again Rosetta makes a very bad image: The translations for Intrepid
> have been opened quite late (after feature freeze). A lot of upstream
> translations are missing. In the case of KDE it is a total desaster:
> E.g. the upstream translation of konqueror is nearly 100% in Kubuntu
> only ~ 50%. The corresponding upstream team is more than disappointed.

It's not much better with GNOME, a lot of important translations, like
Evolution, are missing as well.

I can only speculate that the reason is that every new domain has to
be hand approved by the Rosetta admins, and there is quite a large
backlog.

However, I believe that this requirement creates a *lot* of totally
unnecessary busy-work. Based on the import logic I wrote for the
ancient langpack-o-matic (which directly took the package translation
tarballs and created langpacks out of them), 90% of source packages
can be imported totally automatically in a robust way, and a lot more
can with relatively robust heuristics rules. I only had to create
manual mapping rules for a mere 5(!) source packages, and those cases
can be detected very easily.

So I strongly propose the Launchpad translations developers to improve
the import logic instead of wasting precious developer time on
approving all domains manually. I talked about this briefly with
Jeroen last week, and he seemed to be open to the idea.

Thanks,

Martin

--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Am Sonntag, den 14.09.2008, 10:37 +0200 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> Sebastian Heinlein [2008-09-13 21:45 +0200]:
> > once again Rosetta makes a very bad image: The translations for Intrepid
> > have been opened quite late (after feature freeze). A lot of upstream
> > translations are missing. In the case of KDE it is a total desaster:
> > E.g. the upstream translation of konqueror is nearly 100% in Kubuntu
> > only ~ 50%. The corresponding upstream team is more than disappointed.
>
> It's not much better with GNOME, a lot of important translations, like
> Evolution, are missing as well.

[..]

> So I strongly propose the Launchpad translations developers to improve
> the import logic instead of wasting precious developer time on
> approving all domains manually. I talked about this briefly with
> Jeroen last week, and he seemed to be open to the idea.

Would be nice to get a statement from the Rosetta developers about their
next steps and the timeframe for a solution.

It is not only the developers' time but also the time of translators. We
have to organize the translation. Regarding all the blog posts recently
there are already teams targeting the Intrepid translation.

Regards,

Sebastian


--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Hi Sebastian,

У уто, 16. 09 2008. у 08:20 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein пише:
> Am Sonntag, den 14.09.2008, 10:37 +0200 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> > Sebastian Heinlein [2008-09-13 21:45 +0200]:
> > > once again Rosetta makes a very bad image: The translations for Intrepid
> > > have been opened quite late (after feature freeze). A lot of upstream
> > > translations are missing. In the case of KDE it is a total desaster:
> > > E.g. the upstream translation of konqueror is nearly 100% in Kubuntu
> > > only ~ 50%. The corresponding upstream team is more than disappointed.
> >
> > It's not much better with GNOME, a lot of important translations, like
> > Evolution, are missing as well.

Evolution has always been a special case in GNOME. Everything else
should be fine, except for a few new applications. I took a look at
actual non-approved templates, and apart from Evolution, I see no other
"important" GNOME modules (there are gtkengines, galculator, ggz, and
epiphany-extensions).

So, while I understand the frustration this has caused, I'd like to
point out that our auto-approval works very well for GNOME (and
GNOME-based) packages. It's probably not coincidence, since all of
previous Launchpad Translations developers (myself included) have been
involved with GNOME instead of eg. KDE, and this reflects their better
understanding of GNOME internals.

> > So I strongly propose the Launchpad translations developers to improve
> > the import logic instead of wasting precious developer time on
> > approving all domains manually. I talked about this briefly with
> > Jeroen last week, and he seemed to be open to the idea.
>
> Would be nice to get a statement from the Rosetta developers about their
> next steps and the timeframe for a solution.

We've switched over the duty of handling template approvals for Ubuntu
to Ubuntu Translation Coordination team. However, due to a mix-up in
responsibilities, this didn't go very well this time. Of course, add in
a KDE4 import which is completely different from KDE3 as far as
templates go, and you've got a big problem.

We are discussing improving the import logic for the future, but someone
still needs to go through all the remaining non-approved POT files in
the queue. I.e. we are looking into solving this particular problem
ASAP, and especially cleaning up the junk in the short term, and
approving KDE4 templates for the first time.

Canonical is also hiring a full-time Ubuntu Translation Coordinator
person who should be able to catch problems like these early (we've
tried having a volunteer do that, but that never moved past Ubuntu
Community Council or something), and also who'd be responsible in
keeping Ubuntu translations going (including watching over the import
queue).

> It is not only the developers' time but also the time of translators. We
> have to organize the translation. Regarding all the blog posts recently
> there are already teams targeting the Intrepid translation.

You've asked specifically for Rosetta developers perspective, so I am
giving you one. Note that my opinion is my own, as a Launchpad
Translations developer, and should not be considered for anything more
than that.

I can identify ~450 non-junk templates we have unreviewed from Ubuntu
packages. Out of those, around 350 seem to be KDE, 50 for Ubuntu Docs
and Kubuntu docs (some of which are duplicates), 15 for GNOME or GTK
+-using packages, and the remaining 30-something for different
applications introduced in Intrepid.

In general, we are not used to having these 350 for manual approval with
every release of Ubuntu. Others seem to be half-junk and
half-legitimate, but a 100 entries is a much easier job to review than
450 with KDE ones.

Cheers,
Danilo



--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

2008/9/17 Danilo Å*egan <danilo@canonical.com>:
> I can identify ~450 non-junk templates we have unreviewed from Ubuntu
> packages.

What about the 40 000 PO files that are at "Needs review" [1],
including ones from packages and ones uploaded from translators. Do
they somehow need to be manually processed, too, or are all of those
simply waiting for the respective templates to be approved and then
they will be too (unless they are "junk")?

This if of course already a bit OT, but since all my PO uploads always
go to "Needs review" state instead of "Approved" (the state before
actual import), I'm wondering how they are processed. And I also
wonder if the uploads I have lately done will be processed only after
the current 40k queue is otherwise handled.

[1] https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+imports?field.filter_status=NEEDS_REVIEW&field.fi lter_extension=po

-Timo
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Timo Jyrinki wrote:
> 2008/9/17 Danilo Å*egan <danilo@canonical.com>:
>> I can identify ~450 non-junk templates we have unreviewed from Ubuntu
>> packages.
>
> What about the 40 000 PO files that are at "Needs review" [1],
> including ones from packages and ones uploaded from translators. Do
> they somehow need to be manually processed, too, or are all of those
> simply waiting for the respective templates to be approved and then
> they will be too (unless they are "junk")?

I'm sorry for the late reply; I've been having some very distracting
hardware problems on (top of being busy with this issue).

All files go in as "needs review." An automated process then tries to
do the routine approvals. That mostly means trying to match an upload
to an already known template; and for translations, figuring out which
language they're for as well. The right template name and translation
domain are attached to the import request, and it can move on to actual
import. Other files need to be blocked, which is done by a similar
process (again with the status of a template influencing the status of
its translations as well).

This process takes care of most files, but when templates are new (or
have changed filenames) they often don't get approved in this way. In
that case, a human needs to intervene.

Once a template is imported, its translation files are automatically
approved--assuming that it's clear what template they belong to, and
their language codes can be confidently extracted from their filenames.

Whether a file needs human review isn't always clear-cut. For example,
some new template may be imported, or an existing one renamed, and
suddenly it becomes approvable. For example, Evolution has templates
with names that include the version number. A template for a new
version then looks like a completely separate template to the system
(and in some cases, adding a number to a template name does mean that
it's a completely different file). So instead of just importing a
template evolution-2.24 for Intrepid, we copy evolution-2.22 from Hardy
along with all its translations; rename that copy to evolution-2.24; and
then wait for auto-approval to recognize evolution-2.24.pot and its
translations as simple updates.


> This if of course already a bit OT, but since all my PO uploads always
> go to "Needs review" state instead of "Approved" (the state before
> actual import), I'm wondering how they are processed. And I also
> wonder if the uploads I have lately done will be processed only after
> the current 40k queue is otherwise handled.

The queue entries, once they are approved, are imported in the order of
the date of their first upload. If you upload an update, the request
will keep its original date so you're not bounced to the back of the queue.

Hope this gives a bit more insight into the process.


Jeroen


--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Jeroen Vermeulen [2008-09-25 20:40 +0700]:
> Whether a file needs human review isn't always clear-cut. For example,
> some new template may be imported, or an existing one renamed, and
> suddenly it becomes approvable. For example, Evolution has templates
> with names that include the version number. A template for a new
> version then looks like a completely separate template to the system
> (and in some cases, adding a number to a template name does mean that
> it's a completely different file). So instead of just importing a
> template evolution-2.24 for Intrepid, we copy evolution-2.22 from Hardy
> along with all its translations; rename that copy to evolution-2.24; and
> then wait for auto-approval to recognize evolution-2.24.pot and its
> translations as simple updates.

In fact this spethial case has bothered me a lot. We have never
supported running multiple evolution packages in parallel, since we
don't do them (our package name does not have the version number, for
example). Therefore I don't actually see a reason to not change the
domain to just "evolution" in our packages?

If a developer installs the upstream version, that would still install
the -version.po files, and also into /usr/share/locale (instaed of
/usr/share/locale-langpack/), so they wouldn't get into each other's
way.

Sebastien, do you see a reason to keep the versioned domain in our
evolution package? If it's just specified in one place (usually the
configure.in in GNOME), changing it should be easy.

Thanks,

Martin
--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

Le vendredi 26 septembre 2008 à 18:48 +0200, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> Sebastien, do you see a reason to keep the versioned domain in our
> evolution package? If it's just specified in one place (usually the
> configure.in in GNOME), changing it should be easy.

Hey,

No real reason to not do the change, we just didn't do it because nobody
asked for that and that's extra diff over GNOME and debian, since we
have to run autoconf for the lpi changes anyway that's not an issue but
ideally rosetta should get that right and we should not have to
workaround the ubuntu packages for such reasons

Sebastien Bacher


--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?
 

2008/9/25 Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv@canonical.com>:
> Hope this gives a bit more insight into the process.

Thank you, it really did. The "Needs review" is then a bit fuzzy term,
since one cannot know whether it will automatically get Approved and
then Imported or not. But thanks a lot, anyway.

As the KDE4 pot:s seem to be imported now (though po files not yet),
there's "only" 132 "Needs review" pot:s queued. Of those, I'd like to
point out this one:

https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/app-install-data-ubuntu/+imports

...just because being able to translate those entries in
gnome-app-install would be a major l10n improvement in intrepid.

In the end, the goal would hopefully be putting the amount of stuff in
"Needs review" to plain zero - otherwise there's always a certain
uncertainty about whether some specific pot (or po) will go in or will
be queued indefinitely. The fact that there is files in queue from
April for intrepid does not give confidence that a specific later file
would be imported.

-Timo

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users