[gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 873 bytes --]

Okay, the subject has too much characters, but I hope I get the attention of
the people interested.

On http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0010.txt (and
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0010.html) you will find a proposal
regarding a restructuration of the CVS layout and permissions for the
Documentation and Website (i.e. only [gentoo]/xml/htdocs). 

In short: this proposal implements a new cvs structure and permissions so
that we can safely start with the internationalization as discussed on
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23199

All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it is
mainly infrastructure related.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen

PS Reply-To set to gentoo-dev@gentoo.org, please discuss everything in that
  mailinglist (no need for crossposting).

-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Svyatogor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1831 bytes --]

I just want to clarify something. We are gonna have ${LANGUAGE}.gentoo.org -> www.gentoo.org/${LANGUAGE}  which will contain the localised version of existing www.gentoo.org + links to community pages. Did I get it right?

Another proposal, which has been discussed for a while is that community pages (or rather 1 page) should actually be maintained by Gentoo itself. Other words, $LANG.gentoo.org rather than being a simple translation of existing of main website will be a localised page (please note the diff. between translation and localisation). Though this page will have to comply with some standarts, authors will be more or less free to add the information, which they feel is important for their community.

Any ideas?

On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 20:31:08 +0200
Sven Vermeulen <swift@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Okay, the subject has too much characters, but I hope I get the attention of
> the people interested.
> 
> On http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0010.txt (and
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0010.html) you will find a proposal
> regarding a restructuration of the CVS layout and permissions for the
> Documentation and Website (i.e. only [gentoo]/xml/htdocs). 
> 
> In short: this proposal implements a new cvs structure and permissions so
> that we can safely start with the internationalization as discussed on
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23199
> 
> All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it is
> mainly infrastructure related.
> 
> Wkr,
> 	Sven Vermeulen
> 
> PS Reply-To set to gentoo-dev@gentoo.org, please discuss everything in that
>   mailinglist (no need for crossposting).
> 
> -- 
>     Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.
> 


-- 
Let the Force be with us!
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Public Key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~sergey/gentoo-gpg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1125 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 01:18:31PM +0300, Svyatogor wrote:
> I just want to clarify something. We are gonna have ${LANGUAGE}.gentoo.org
> -> www.gentoo.org/${LANGUAGE}  which will contain the localised version of
> existing www.gentoo.org + links to community pages. Did I get it right?

Yes and no. The translation team can opt for having the whole site
translated, but it can also implement your next paragraph:

> Another proposal, which has been discussed for a while is that community
> pages (or rather 1 page) should actually be maintained by Gentoo itself.
> Other words, $LANG.gentoo.org rather than being a simple translation of
> existing of main website will be a localised page (please note the diff.
> between translation and localisation). Though this page will have to comply
> with some standarts, authors will be more or less free to add the
> information, which they feel is important for their community.

The translation team can edit its own index.xml file how it sees fit. Both
implementations are possible.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen


-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[FRLinux]

On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 12:43, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> The translation team can edit its own index.xml file how it sees fit. Both
> implementations are possible.

And i think this is the best way to go as it is not obvious and easy to
get a whole website translated and maintained.

Steph

> Wkr,
> 	Sven Vermeulen
-- 
Mail sent on Gentoo 1.4rc3 k2.6-test2 AMD 2600+
http://frlinux.net - frlinux@frlinux.net
http://gentoofr.org - Portail Francais sur Gentoo Linux




--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Svyatogor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 975 bytes --]

On 05 Aug 2003 12:50:35 +0100
FRLinux <frlinux@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 12:43, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > The translation team can edit its own index.xml file how it sees fit. Both
> > implementations are possible.
> 
> And i think this is the best way to go as it is not obvious and easy to
> get a whole website translated and maintained.
> 
Not only that. It is much less useful for the end user. However, in this case we'll have to develop some policy about these pages. Most users will see fr.gentoo.org or ru.gentoo.org as official gentoo homepages and we have to be careful on what we put there. The policy should cover various aspects, such as design (some team might want to change the layout of the page or just change the color scheme), content of the pages, people responsible for maintaining it up-to-date and accurate. 

-- 
Let the Force be with us!
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Public Key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~sergey/gentoo-gpg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1737 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:03:56PM +0300, Svyatogor wrote:
> Not only that. It is much less useful for the end user. However, in this
> case we'll have to develop some policy about these pages. Most users will
> see fr.gentoo.org or ru.gentoo.org as official gentoo homepages and we have
> to be careful on what we put there. The policy should cover various
> aspects, such as design (some team might want to change the layout of the
> page or just change the color scheme), content of the pages, people
> responsible for maintaining it up-to-date and accurate. 

I agree that translating and maintaining the whole website is cumbersome to
say the least. What I was thinking about was something in the lines of
http://dev.gentoo.org/~swift/international.html (note: the links don't work,
probably never will :) as main page for http://en.gentoo.org (I take this as
an example because I assume all know English :)

From that main webpage, the visitor can reach the translated documentation or
a list of community websites. 

Maintaining this is "easy":
	* new translations get added as they are now,
	  + a newsitem on the site occurs explaining that there is a new
	    translation 
	* new community sites are added to two pages: the one which lists 
	  all community sites, and a link on the left of each page 
	  + a newsitem on the site occurs explaining that there is a new
	    community site

That's all there is to it. Ofcourse, newsitems regarding new (translated)
GWN's could be listed there too.

Just an idea, ofcourse.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen

PS gerrynjr: can you try changing your mailclient so it wraps its sentences
   automatically? 


-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Svyatogor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1065 bytes --]

On 05 Aug 2003 09:31:28 -0400
Lisa Marie Seelye <lisa@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 14:31, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it is
> > mainly infrastructure related.
> 
> 
> I've been pondering this for a while.
> 
> What I came up with was a directory structure that would look something
> like this:
> 
> /$herd/$subproject/$lang/document.xml
> 
> For example:
> /cluster/distcc/en/guide.xml (the distcc guide)
> 
> To me it seems more logical to move the language divider closer to the
> document so that the translation team doesn't have to translate all of
> the website (as opposed to /$lang/$proj/$herd).

Hey! You didn't get it. The thing is that we (translators) do want to be able to translate the whole web site and not just some docs. At the moment we can't do that - look at the result: community pages are growing around like mushrooms after the rain.

-- 
Let the Force be with us!
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Public Key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~sergey/gentoo-gpg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Lisa Marie Seelye]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 809 bytes --]

On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 14:31, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it is
> mainly infrastructure related.


I've been pondering this for a while.

What I came up with was a directory structure that would look something
like this:

/$herd/$subproject/$lang/document.xml

For example:
/cluster/distcc/en/guide.xml (the distcc guide)

To me it seems more logical to move the language divider closer to the
document so that the translation team doesn't have to translate all of
the website (as opposed to /$lang/$proj/$herd).

I have to head out in a little bit; when I get home I will flesh this
out a bit and try to set up a diagram or example.

-- 
Regards,
-Lisa
<Vix ulla tam iniqua pax, quin bello vel aequissimo sit potior>

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1196 bytes --]

On Tuesday 05 August 2003 15:31, Lisa Marie Seelye wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 14:31, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it
> > is mainly infrastructure related.
>
> I've been pondering this for a while.
>
> What I came up with was a directory structure that would look something
> like this:
>
> /$herd/$subproject/$lang/document.xml
>

Let me explain it once again. A herd is a group of ebuilds. Nothing more, 
nothing less. Such a group of ebuilds has maintainers, and an owner project. 
That project can have webpages, a herd cannot. A project can have multiple 
herds. By definition all people inside any of the herds of a project are part 
of the project in some way. (There can be additional people in the project 
though). The project has/will get a root under which it can have its own 
pages (in gentoo style), in an ordering that is basically free to the 
project. Although there will probably have to be some kind of "official" 
project page that uses a predefined setup (or even a new dtd)

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Researcher
Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl
Homepage: http://www.cs.kun.nl/~pauldv

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 971 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:31:28AM -0400, Lisa Marie Seelye wrote:
> I've been pondering this for a while.
> 
> What I came up with was a directory structure that would look something
> like this:
> 
> /$herd/$subproject/$lang/document.xml
> 
> For example:
> /cluster/distcc/en/guide.xml (the distcc guide)
> 
> To me it seems more logical to move the language divider closer to the
> document so that the translation team doesn't have to translate all of
> the website (as opposed to /$lang/$proj/$herd).

In my opinion it is a bad idea to have the language-part so close to the
document. That would mean that the CVS permissions for each translation team
would be unmaintainable (meaning hundreds of seperate directories for each
language, whereas my proposal has one directory).

Documentation should be centralised as much as possible, this goes for
translations too.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen


-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 691 bytes --]

On Tuesday 05 August 2003 17:21, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
>
> In my opinion it is a bad idea to have the language-part so close to the
> document. That would mean that the CVS permissions for each translation
> team would be unmaintainable (meaning hundreds of seperate directories for
> each language, whereas my proposal has one directory).
>
> Documentation should be centralised as much as possible, this goes for
> translations too.

I see no problems with just keeping the current /proj/en structure either 
(although actually creating some translations should help)

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1128 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:51:54PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
Content-Description: signed data
> I see no problems with just keeping the current /proj/en structure either 
> (although actually creating some translations should help)

There is a problem with having /proj/en structure: it is illogical for
translations and permissions. Think as a system admin with 19 projects (if I
can count correctly).

What would you prefer? Have permissions for each project seperately, and then
have one permission for the translations, or have permissions for each
project, each language seperately?

In the latter case, you would have to assign permissions to the same group of
translators 19 times, meaning 285 assignments (15 languages in total
including English). The former only once, meaning 33 assignments (19 for the
projects and 14 for the resulting languages).

For the non-translating teams there is no change (except directory
structure). But the internationalization-proposal really requires such a
change to become effective.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen


-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2643 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200 or thereabouts, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0010.html

> All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it is
> mainly infrastructure related.

OK, so I finally had a chance to review and think about this GLEP.  Below
are some questions/comments that I have.

1) I'd like Robin (robbat2) to comment on this since the primary reason for
the GLEP seems to be better control over CVS permissions.  I know Robin has
some ideas on how he wants to change CVS permissions, so his feedback here
is important. (cc'd on this email)

2) One thing that isn't clear in the GLEP.  Is
http://www.gentoo.org/${LANGUAGE} an *exact* copy of
http://www.gentoo.org/en/?  Or are the internationalization teams allowed
to change things?  For the most part, I would like to ensure that we have
one, consistent web site, so I'd like to see translations happening, but
not alternate content per se.

You touch a bit upon this in the "Internationalized Website" but I'm still
not clear on how it works, so some clarification would be appreciated.

3) Regarding permissions, I don't really like the idea of the entire docs
team having commit access to /en/main/.  I realize that's the case now
because of where docs.xml resides, but if we're going to restructure things
then I'd like to change that.  Ideally, I would like members of cvsdoc to
have commit access to /en/docs/ and the cvsweb group to have commit access
to /en/main/.  cvswebdoc is a nasty hack of a solution created because of
our current structure.  I'd like to see it killed off as part of this
restructure.

4) How do /en/proj/* pages get translated?

5) One significant problem we have with the GWN is translation teams not
keeping things up to date.  This may be outside of the scope of this GLEP,
but I'd sure like to see a defined policy that states what is expected of
the translation teams and at what point a language will be "killed off"
from the web site for falling behind.  We *do not* want to have
/<language>/doc/gentoo-x86-install.xml handing out the wrong information.
If we can't keep a language up to date, it should be removed entirely imo.

6) Backwards compatibility needs to be maintained.  Think of all the
external links to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-x86-install.xml on
other sites.  We can't simply cause all of them to break.  We can do some
fancy footwork with mod_rewrite to facilitate this, but the GLEP needs to
be updated to reflect the fact that we *will* make a best effort to
maintain backwards compatibility.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3078 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 01:43:05PM +0200 or thereabouts, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > Another proposal, which has been discussed for a while is that community
> > pages (or rather 1 page) should actually be maintained by Gentoo itself.
> > Other words, $LANG.gentoo.org rather than being a simple translation of
> > existing of main website will be a localised page (please note the diff.
> > between translation and localisation). Though this page will have to comply
> > with some standarts, authors will be more or less free to add the
> > information, which they feel is important for their community.
> 
> The translation team can edit its own index.xml file how it sees fit. Both
> implementations are possible.

This is one area that I disagree with.  I feel we need to have consistency
across the web site, including translated versions.  Using French as an
example language, you may have folks that prefer to check the site in
english (because it's easier to type 'www.gentoo.org') and may not ever
check the www.gentoo.org/fr/index.xml page.  If you have inconsistent
versions of news across the pages, our users will suffer.  Now they'll have
to check both pages in order to get a full picture of what's going on in
the Gentoo world.

FRLinux said in his bug report that "Gentoo Officials were denying a
possibility to have a full Gentoo Community."  I'm not sure who he was
referring to, but it wasn't me.  I'm quite open to the idea of allowing
country-specific official gentoo web pages.  There were only three
stipulations:

1) anything that falls under a *.gentoo.org name needs to maintain the
   consistent look and feel of the main gentoo.org site.

2) they need to publish their docs using guide-xsl.  This is more of a
   technical requirement since our entire web site is built around AxKit
   and XML.  It also ensures that, if we update the look/feel of the web
   site in the future, all pages in the *.gentoo.org domain will be updated
   instantly.

3) they need to reside on a gentoo.org infrastructure server.  Again, if it
   ends in gentoo.org, we need to have control over the security of the
   server and also have the ability to yank inappropriate content in an
   emergency.  I won't risk having a rogue user get pissed off and posting
   "gentoo is a bunch of communist pinkos" on their country page.

That's it.  I'm still open to creating those pages on a *country* specific
basis, but not a language specific one.  (otherwise, how do we handle
countries like England, Canada and the US which all speak English)

Reading over FRLinux's bug report, along with Sven's GLEP, it sounds to me
like we're trying to solve two different problems:

1) internationalizing the web site, ensuring that all gentoo pages are
   offered in multiple languages
2) give user communities in other countries the ability to have their own
   localized pages.

Both are achievable and I'm willing to help support both,
infrastructure-wise.  However, I think the solutions should be kept
separate.

--kurt

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 691 bytes --]

On Tuesday 12 August 2003 15:05, Kurt Lieber wrote:
>
> 1) internationalizing the web site, ensuring that all gentoo pages are
>    offered in multiple languages
> 2) give user communities in other countries the ability to have their own
>    localized pages.
>
> Both are achievable and I'm willing to help support both,
> infrastructure-wise.  However, I think the solutions should be kept
> separate.

I think you have a very good point here, and I support it fully. That meaning, 
the say french localized page could very well be in french as far as I'm 
concerned.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Researcher
Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl
Homepage: http://www.cs.kun.nl/~pauldv

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4582 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:45:17AM -0400, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> 2) One thing that isn't clear in the GLEP.  Is
> http://www.gentoo.org/${LANGUAGE} an *exact* copy of
> http://www.gentoo.org/en/?  Or are the internationalization teams allowed
> to change things?  For the most part, I would like to ensure that we have
> one, consistent web site, so I'd like to see translations happening, but
> not alternate content per se.

I was hoping not to translate the site, but have the
http://www.gentoo.org/${LANGUAGE} be something like this:
	http://dev.gentoo.org/~swift/international.html

It provides the user with:
	- translated documentation
	- a listing of community sites in that language
	- language-specific newsitems:
		* new translations (both doc or GWN)
		* new community site
		* perhaps translated news items from www.gentoo.org

> You touch a bit upon this in the "Internationalized Website" but I'm still
> not clear on how it works, so some clarification would be appreciated.

Personally I don't believe in translating a site, although I've left the
possibility open since there are probably people who do like to see
www.gentoo.org translated. 
 
> 3) Regarding permissions, I don't really like the idea of the entire docs
> team having commit access to /en/main/.  I realize that's the case now
> because of where docs.xml resides, but if we're going to restructure things
> then I'd like to change that.  Ideally, I would like members of cvsdoc to
> have commit access to /en/docs/ and the cvsweb group to have commit access
> to /en/main/.  cvswebdoc is a nasty hack of a solution created because of
> our current structure.  I'd like to see it killed off as part of this
> restructure.

Fine by me. The stricter the permissions, the better. 

You can also seperate the main website from the "translated" websites. Have
the main website in [gentoo]/xml/htdocs/main, while all the rest resides in
[gentoo]/xml/htdocs/${LANGUAGE}/main (with ${LANGUAGE} including "en").

With this, the cvsweb group has commit access to the main website, while the
cvsdocen has to the english, cvsdocnl to the dutch, cvsdocfr to the french
etc...

So, more schematic:

* http://www.gentoo.org
	- Main website
	- CVS: [gentoo]/xml/htdocs/main and subdirectories
	- CVS-commit: "cvsweb" group

* http://www.gentoo.org/en    ( == http://en.gentoo.org)
	- English documentation / communities website
	- CVS: [gentoo]/xml/htdocs/en/ and subdirectories
	- CVS-commit: "cvsdocen" group

* http://www.gentoo.org/fr    ( == http://fr.gentoo.org)
	- French documentation / communities website
	- CVS: [gentoo]/xml/htdocs/fr and subdirectories
	- CVS-commot: "cvsdocfr" group

etc.

As FRLinux pointed out somewhere, a strict policy on how the
http://${LANGUAGE}.gentoo.org website looks like, and what comes on it is
probably needed.
 
> 4) How do /en/proj/* pages get translated?

By the translationteams, who have access to
	${LANGUAGE}/
so can translate
	${LANGUAGE}/proj/*
 
> 5) One significant problem we have with the GWN is translation teams not
> keeping things up to date.  This may be outside of the scope of this GLEP,
> but I'd sure like to see a defined policy that states what is expected of
> the translation teams and at what point a language will be "killed off"
> from the web site for falling behind.  We *do not* want to have
> /<language>/doc/gentoo-x86-install.xml handing out the wrong information.
> If we can't keep a language up to date, it should be removed entirely imo.

Agreed. However, this is related to the GDP policy itself (for documentation)
and indeed not related to this GLEP. Sergey and I will make sure that
translations do not fall behind, and that they are removed from the website
if they do.

I'm not speaking in behalf of the GWN though, it's not really my domain.
 
> 6) Backwards compatibility needs to be maintained.  Think of all the
> external links to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-x86-install.xml on
> other sites.  We can't simply cause all of them to break.  We can do some
> fancy footwork with mod_rewrite to facilitate this, but the GLEP needs to
> be updated to reflect the fact that we *will* make a best effort to
> maintain backwards compatibility.

One way to do so is to have a /doc with symlinks all over the place. Since
there is no /doc in the proposal, no precautions have to be taken. Except
ofcourse allowing the webserver to follow symlinks.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen

-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1514 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 09:05:16AM -0400, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> 1) anything that falls under a *.gentoo.org name needs to maintain the
>    consistent look and feel of the main gentoo.org site.
> 
> 2) they need to publish their docs using guide-xsl.  This is more of a
>    technical requirement since our entire web site is built around AxKit
>    and XML.  It also ensures that, if we update the look/feel of the web
>    site in the future, all pages in the *.gentoo.org domain will be updated
>    instantly.
> 
> 3) they need to reside on a gentoo.org infrastructure server.  Again, if it
>    ends in gentoo.org, we need to have control over the security of the
>    server and also have the ability to yank inappropriate content in an
>    emergency.  I won't risk having a rogue user get pissed off and posting
>    "gentoo is a bunch of communist pinkos" on their country page.

I agree fully to this. 
 
> That's it.  I'm still open to creating those pages on a *country* specific
> basis, but not a language specific one.  (otherwise, how do we handle
> countries like England, Canada and the US which all speak English)

They use the same documentation, don't they? If the page with the English
communities mentions the location of each community, then this issue is
solved. I don't see a reason of having seperate ${COUNTRY}.gentoo.org
domains just because their communities are located elsewhere...
 
Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen

-- 
    Save some animals, eat a vegetarian.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Svyatogor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2513 bytes --]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 08:45:17 -0400
Kurt Lieber <klieber@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200 or thereabouts, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0010.html
> 
> > All feedback appreciated, especially from the infrastructure folks as it is
> > mainly infrastructure related.
> 
> OK, so I finally had a chance to review and think about this GLEP.  Below
> are some questions/comments that I have.
> 
> 1) I'd like Robin (robbat2) to comment on this since the primary reason for
> the GLEP seems to be better control over CVS permissions.  I know Robin has
> some ideas on how he wants to change CVS permissions, so his feedback here
> is important. (cc'd on this email)
Primary reason depends very much on you point of view. For me primary reason is 
higher level of i18n efforts, including $LANG.gentoo.org

> 
> 2) One thing that isn't clear in the GLEP.  Is
> http://www.gentoo.org/${LANGUAGE} an *exact* copy of
> http://www.gentoo.org/en/?  Or are the internationalization teams allowed
> to change things?  For the most part, I would like to ensure that we have
> one, consistent web site, so I'd like to see translations happening, but
> not alternate content per se.
> 
> You touch a bit upon this in the "Internationalized Website" but I'm still
> not clear on how it works, so some clarification would be appreciated.

This has been discussed. I believe that many translators (including FRLinux 
and me) have agreed that pure internationalization is prety much useless. I.e.
the $LANG.gentoo.org should contain not only translated items from the main page
but also any news related to their community. 

As you mentioned correctly we are trying to achieve two diff goals internationalization
and support of communities (localization). I feel that Gentoo management does not
fully understand the importance of the second goal. As Gentoo is getting more and more
popular, more communities arrise everywhere. The $LANG.gentoo.org pages have a very good
chance of becoming the leading community pages, the ones which provide the official info.
Otherwise various pages will be created elsewhere and we will not have any effect over them
and over the info they provide. 

Being an international user myself, I know how important it is to have such local support 
strcture and think that we should not miss the chance to implement.


-- 
Let the Force be with us!
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Public Key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~sergey/gentoo-gpg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 878 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 03:41:27PM +0200 or thereabouts, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> They use the same documentation, don't they? If the page with the English
> communities mentions the location of each community, then this issue is
> solved. I don't see a reason of having seperate ${COUNTRY}.gentoo.org
> domains just because their communities are located elsewhere...

Yes, and for your solution that would work fine.  However, other folks
(FRLinux, for one) have asked for the ability to have more control over
their community pages and post individual content, news items, etc.  I
view this as a separate issue that internationalizing the web site and one
that should have a separate solution.

That's where ${COUNTRY}.gentoo.org comes in.

I'm not personally advocating this solution -- merely saying that I'd
support it, infrastructure-wise if enough people want it.

--kurt

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP #10 -- Proposal for restructuring the CVS regarding documentation wrt internationalization proposal

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1966 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:45:17AM -0400, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> 1) I'd like Robin (robbat2) to comment on this since the primary reason for
> the GLEP seems to be better control over CVS permissions.  I know Robin has
> some ideas on how he wants to change CVS permissions, so his feedback here
> is important. (cc'd on this email)
To elaborate on this, I planned to implement the same software FreeBSD
uses to help manage their CVS repository. It consists of a few files in
CVSROOT and changes to existing files there only. It changes us to using
an access control list (contained in files, not using filesystem ACLs)
from the existing UNIX permissions.

The documentation at the top of this file describes the system best.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/CVSROOT-src/cvs_acls.pl?rev=1.24&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup

Here is the 'avail' file for the FreeBSD 'src' tree:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/CVSROOT-src/avail?rev=1.208&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup

There is also a patch to the cvs_acls.pl program so that the directory
elements it takes can be regular expressions.

As a side bonus this would remove the nasty CVS locks that presently
occur when somebody tries to checkin some code to a place that they
don't have access to, and the lock gets left behind.

It also makes it very easy to specifically restrict any given user(s) or
group(s) from any given part of CVS, or vice versa, as an example:
unavail||gentoo-x86/sys-apps/portage,gentoo-src/portage
avail|carpaski|gentoo-x86/sys-apps/portage,gentoo-src/portage

This blocks anybody execept carpaski (and the cvsadmins as they would
have a later rule allowing them global access) from being able to modify
portage.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]