Re: [native-lang] Re: [l10n-dev] Re: [native-lang] questions on ES builds

Hello Richard,

Le Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:17:49 -0430,
Richard <[email protected]> a écrit :

> 
> Charles-H. Schulz escribió:
> > Alexandro,
> >
> >
> > Le 26/02/10 11:51, Alexandro Colorado a écrit :
> >   
> >>>>
> >>>> Are you saying I can't patch things myself? That is a ridiculous
> >>>> statement for a FLOSS project.
> >>>>         
> >>> No I'm not saying this at all. You are free to patch pretty much
> >>> everything in Free and Open Source Software. In fact you're even
> >>> free to patch the Linux kernel, but it does not mean that 1) your
> >>> patch will be accepted 2) the patch will be integrated as fast as
> >>> you want if it is accepted.
> >>>       
> >> Seems to me my patch got accepted just fine, release guys got no
> >> problem taking my builds.
> >>     
> >
> >
> > And obviously they knew they would run out of time to integrate it
> > before the release. It was RC 5 remember. So far, all this does look
> > like if you could only submit your patch at RC 5 level, perhaps the
> > ES QA process is somewhat suboptimal.
> >
> >   
> >>     
> >>> What we have here now is rigorously identical. You released a
> >>> patch somewhere around the RC 5 (RC 5, again, not beta nor RC 1)
> >>> and then you are surprised when you're being told your patch came
> >>> in too late and that it will be included in the next
> >>> micro-release (2.3.1). But that is not enough for you so you
> >>> decide to switch builds. 
> >> Well I was a bit surprised specially because they ask us to
> >> gsicheck it which send the signal that they will integrate it asap.
> >>     
> >
> > Perhaps this calls for a clarification of the process of patch
> > integration, especially the l10n related ones. It would probably be
> > helpful, what do you think?
> >
> >   
> >>> So in short, it's not about freedom: it's about following a
> >>> community process. Not following such a process is ridiculous for
> >>> a FLOSS project. 
> >> As far as I know the process wasn't really affected, there was a
> >> QA, there was a release build, and it was patched and then
> >> released with no major question asked.
> >>     
> >
> >
> > That's an interesting way to formulate it: if you were fine with
> > whatever the release team did then why do we find ourselves in a
> > situation where builds got switched?
> >
> >
> >   
> >> The only issue here is somewhat amusing since
> >> you are not in QA, nor release nor l10n. So what exactly is your
> >> business here?
> >>     
> >
> > I am in QA, and I'm in l10n, because that's my role: NLC is QA +
> > l0n + documentation + marketing + users support. I am supposed to
> > stand, just like you and every other native-lang lead, at the
> > crossroads of each of these efforts. This becomes particularly
> > acute when I receive complaints on one specific localization. In
> > this case it turns out it was the ES one.
> >
> > Charles.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >   
> I think the thing to do is forget the bickering. And plan how to
> avoid the problem in the future.
> 
> Lots of effort goes into getting the translations done in a short
> amount of time with limited resources. The problem may be that
> Sun/Oracle is no longer building the Spanish OOo in a timely fashion.
> I may be wrong but that is why I get my instance of OOo via my distro
> who in turn get it from Go-OO.

Which in turns brings some instability issues. No bickering from my
side, Richard, but a need to  remedy to this issue. But that's the
distro's choice. Anyway; a good discussion on these processes has
started on dev@l10n , which is good and I hope we will be able to
improve the overall situation. 

best,
Charles. 

>