On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Maren Hachmann <maren@...325...> wrote:

Am 30.10.2016 um 05:40 schrieb Yaron Shahrabani:
> It's django-based - would it work as an app in the existing django
> website? (we'd need to keep an eye on server resources atm, though).

- Do you happen to know if the django-based translation software weblate
would integrate with other django systems?

I've added Michal in the first mail I sent in this thread, maybe he can assist if needed.

In terms of API there's a very good support so whether it's django or python or whatever.

The other option is I didn't understand your question.

> Mozilla have a relatively new method called L20n (http://www.L20n.org)
> that is more suitable to website translation than gettext, also has a
> better individual string refrence allowing pluralizing and genderizing a
> single string in a different manner than all the other strings on the
> website.
> This will require separating the website translation from the other
> parts but it gives better agility.
>

- We are using django-cms. Will it integrate with that?

There's a POC I ran into so I guess it does:

https://github.com/stasm/django-l20n

I can ask for more assistance from Mozilla directly if needed.

>
> Something like this - having it as an integral part of the website - was
> one of Martin's long-term goals (don't know how he thinks about it
> currently), to increase user-involvement.
>
> Could be nice. I agree with Alex that quality is important. I think it
> could be improved by having teams where people know each other (which
> the website already supports) and can communicate.
>
> It doesn't affect quality, professional translators all over the world
> are using certain tools for translation, meaning that they get the
> strings from the client and then they open it in a dedicated translation
> tool and then hand it over to the customer (which is pretty similar to
> what's being done right now), what I'm suggesting is to cut the middle
> man and give the translator a web access to what they are already doing
> but with less logistics.

- I think we are talking past one another. I wasn't saying that the
quality would be impacted negatively by adding a different tool to our
belt, I was saying that it could help to build teams if we use the
website for this, and that I believe that having teams can help improve
quality.

Especially if there's no problem that these tools will co exist or managed in a completely different repository.

> As an example, I've been enjoying working together with Eduard on the
> German program translations (he setup a github repo for this). I think
> it also had a positive impact on the quality, because we reviewed each
> other's work and had a place to discuss the tricky things.
>
> Great to hear, can I add the Hebrew translation there and connect
> Transifex to it?

- I think you would have to ask Eduard about this. Currently, we only
have the German files included, and use the option to comment on the
commits for discussions (partially in German), so it's mostly a
convenient place to coordinate our translation efforts.

I did these kind of things myself several times, now I'm trying to get Kore's team attention, doesn't work so well as the past times :)

Maren