[Development] Using Transifex for handling Qt localization?

Oswald Buddenhagen oswald.buddenhagen at nokia.com
Fri May 18 10:46:13 CEST 2012

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 03:55:41PM -0700, ext Quim Gil wrote:
> - How valuable is to have an efficient tool for handling translations 
> between teams - as opposed to whatever process we have now? Are we happy 
> with the current system? Do we believe we would improve significantly 
> with a tool like Transifex?
not being a translator myself (except to help out with strings i have
some relation to as the developer), i cannot really assess the added
value. i can imagine it would be significant - qt linguist just ain't
that great, and our review infrastructure completely sucks for
i cc'd the qt-l10n list to move the discussion over to a relevant place.

> fwiw I just learned that Transifex allows projects to define a CLA which 
> needs to be signed before joining a team.
> As an example (you need to sign in):
>   https://meego.transifex.net/projects/p/meego/cla/
> As far as Reviewing is concerned, there is this feature in Transifex
> itself. Each string can be reviewed from a privileged translator. Each
> team can have any number of reviewers.
you still need to get this sorted with nokia legal, but it sounds like
the tools to make a point are there.

but irrespective of that, i think it would indeed make sense to make the
translations lgpl-only (or use a CC license, as that's more appropriate,
at least in theory) - there doesn't seem to be much of a business case
for making them "proprietarily utilizable" (though we'd need some hard
data from digia on that matter). it would also enable us to use a lot of
qt translations from the kde community.

one thing to consider is that some translators may not particularly like
the idea of using a proprietary web app for their work, so gerrit would
still need to be the authoritative repository with "normal" submissions
enabled. i think that's doable.

More information about the Development mailing list