[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Res: [epf-dev] Notes from January 14, 2010 EPF Project Release Planning call
|
Hi Onno,
I fully agree with your approach of keeping language branches in cvs. I think it is the best way to translate content (XML-files).
I would also suggest that the Wiki is updated from these translations, when the libraries are updated.
Cheers,
Paulo Moreira
De: Onno van der Straaten <onno.van.der.straaten@xxxxxxxxx>
Para: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Enviadas:
Quinta-feira, 21 de Janeiro de 2010 12:03:31
Assunto: Re: [epf-dev] Notes from January 14, 2010 EPF Project Release Planning call
Hi Everyone,
Regarding the translation effort, I think we should consider harvesting what is up in the Wiki into a proper translated EPF Practices library. We started the translation effort a long time ago already but my assumption has always been that this would end op in a library one fine day.
RMC has some export/import functionality I think for supporting translations. Can we use that? The procedure is to export to HTML files which we could translate and then import back. I'm not sure about this as I have never used this. But I think this is not the right approach as RMC is a commercial product and with this approach we would not have any other way than with RMC to maintain the translations.
IMHO the RMC approach is not fundamentally different from creating and maintaining language 'branches' in our CVS repository and then translating the XML-files directly and/or through EPF. Editing HTML does of course offer a different experience to editing XML. And everything will be version controlled so we should be able to recover from big mishaps.
This will require of course a some effort but after the library is completely translated it will be matter of processing the delta's from time to time. A good SCM and some diff tools will make this doable?
Do we consider a proper translated library a proper, worthwhile objective for 2010? Can we live with the branching and XML editing approach I'm proposing? If we do, I'm willing to investigate this a little further to get a better feel of what is required/involved.
Best Regards,
Onno
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Chris Sibbald
<Chris.Sibbald@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Folks,
Here are my notes from the subject call.
Those of you that were on the call could you please:
1) Review the notes and let us know
if you note any significant errors or omissions
2) Ensure the list of attendees is correct
3) Reply to Chris.Sibbald@xxxxxxxxxx
so I have you email address for future distribution of draft minutes for
review prior to sending to the mailing list (and for other one-one communications)
Thanks for attending the call. I
think there are some exciting plans for EPF in 2010 and I am looking forward
to working with all of you.
Cheers,
Chris
Chris Sibbald, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Senior Systems Engineer
Mobile: +1 (613) 266 - 5061
Fax: +1 (613) 739 - 4786
chris.sibbald@xxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
Veja quais são os assuntos do momento no Yahoo! + Buscados:
Top 10 -
Celebridades -
Música -
Esportes
