[Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

Adel Atallah
Hello everyone,

As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/> as
our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
decisions before making an official announcement to the community.

I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:

1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
Pros:
  - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
(which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
  - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
  - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
PRs
Cons:
  - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
the review process seems to be quite hard)
  - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
(and we can't group them)

2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
Pros:
  - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
  - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
Cons:
  - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
don't need to)
  - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
(no locking/suggestions)
  - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)

I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
everything can be checked on the PR.
If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
platform.

WDYT?

Thanks,
Adel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
So only managers can review translations?
There isn't a voting process? Like if 2 independent normal users validate a
translation to be correct, that translation could auto validate itself?

Option 2 seems the only option, because it allows Release Managers to
validate multiple keys at the same time and it's similar to the current
release process.

Thanks,
Caty

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/>
> as
> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>
> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>
> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
> Pros:
>   - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>   - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>   - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
> PRs
> Cons:
>   - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>   - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
> (and we can't group them)
>
> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
> Pros:
>   - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>   - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
> Cons:
>   - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
> don't need to)
>   - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
> (no locking/suggestions)
>   - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>
> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
> everything can be checked on the PR.
> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
> platform.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks,
> Adel
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

Thomas Mortagne
Administrator
1) is probably nice when you have dedicated reviewer for each language
but we are far from this situation. We used to have the same review
process in l10n.xwiki.org but we abandoned it a long time ago because
most keys where never reviewed.

Now something I'm wondering is do you think it would be possible to
have 1) for some languages (English, French and other languages with
people that would be willing be official reviewers) and 2) for others
where less people are active ?

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> So only managers can review translations?
> There isn't a voting process? Like if 2 independent normal users validate a
> translation to be correct, that translation could auto validate itself?
>
> Option 2 seems the only option, because it allows Release Managers to
> validate multiple keys at the same time and it's similar to the current
> release process.
>
> Thanks,
> Caty
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/>
>> as
>> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
>> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>>
>> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
>> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>>
>> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
>> Pros:
>>   - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
>> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>>   - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>>   - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
>> PRs
>> Cons:
>>   - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
>> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>>   - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
>> (and we can't group them)
>>
>> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
>> Pros:
>>   - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>>   - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
>> Cons:
>>   - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
>> don't need to)
>>   - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
>> (no locking/suggestions)
>>   - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>>
>> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
>> everything can be checked on the PR.
>> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
>> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
>> platform.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Adel
>>



--
Thomas Mortagne
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

Adel Atallah
In reply to this post by Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> So only managers can review translations?
> There isn't a voting process? Like if 2 independent normal users validate a
> translation to be correct, that translation could auto validate itself?

Yes this feature exists on Weblate but we'll need enough users to
approve translations and it's also hard to prevent spam (you can
easily create new accounts).

> Option 2 seems the only option, because it allows Release Managers to
> validate multiple keys at the same time and it's similar to the current
> release process.
>
> Thanks,
> Caty
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/>
>> as
>> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
>> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>>
>> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
>> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>>
>> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
>> Pros:
>>   - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
>> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>>   - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>>   - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
>> PRs
>> Cons:
>>   - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
>> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>>   - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
>> (and we can't group them)
>>
>> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
>> Pros:
>>   - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>>   - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
>> Cons:
>>   - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
>> don't need to)
>>   - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
>> (no locking/suggestions)
>>   - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>>
>> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
>> everything can be checked on the PR.
>> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
>> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
>> platform.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Adel
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

vmassol
Administrator
In reply to this post by Adel Atallah
Hi Adel and all,

> On 18 May 2018, at 10:05, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/> as
> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>
> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>
> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
> Pros:
>  - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>  - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>  - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
> PRs
> Cons:
>  - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>  - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
> (and we can't group them)
>
> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
> Pros:
>  - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>  - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
> Cons:
>  - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
> don't need to)
>  - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
> (no locking/suggestions)
>  - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>
> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
> everything can be checked on the PR.
> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
> platform.
>
> WDYT?

Big +1 for 2.

Option 1 is a nightmare IMO:
* One notification email per translation
* No view in weblate to easily review all pending translations to review
* Users cannot change already translated keys and it needs to be done by hand by an admin after a comment/suggestion has been posted by a user

Seen the size we are,1 is completely impossible for me and too painful.

BTW we already had the concept of approved/reviewed translation on the old l10n and we never used it since it’s too painful/hard work.

Thanks
-Vincent

>
> Thanks,
> Adel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

Adel Atallah
In reply to this post by Thomas Mortagne
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> 1) is probably nice when you have dedicated reviewer for each language
> but we are far from this situation. We used to have the same review
> process in l10n.xwiki.org but we abandoned it a long time ago because
> most keys where never reviewed.
>
> Now something I'm wondering is do you think it would be possible to
> have 1) for some languages (English, French and other languages with
> people that would be willing be official reviewers) and 2) for others
> where less people are active ?

Yes it's totally possible and probably a good idea.

> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> So only managers can review translations?
>> There isn't a voting process? Like if 2 independent normal users validate a
>> translation to be correct, that translation could auto validate itself?
>>
>> Option 2 seems the only option, because it allows Release Managers to
>> validate multiple keys at the same time and it's similar to the current
>> release process.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Caty
>>
>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/>
>>> as
>>> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
>>> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>>>
>>> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
>>> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>>>
>>> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
>>> Pros:
>>>   - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
>>> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>>>   - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>>>   - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
>>> PRs
>>> Cons:
>>>   - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
>>> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>>>   - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
>>> (and we can't group them)
>>>
>>> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
>>> Pros:
>>>   - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>>>   - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
>>> Cons:
>>>   - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
>>> don't need to)
>>>   - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
>>> (no locking/suggestions)
>>>   - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>>>
>>> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
>>> everything can be checked on the PR.
>>> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
>>> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
>>> platform.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Adel
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Mortagne
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

vmassol
Administrator
Hi,

> On 18 May 2018, at 10:39, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Mortagne
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> 1) is probably nice when you have dedicated reviewer for each language
>> but we are far from this situation. We used to have the same review
>> process in l10n.xwiki.org but we abandoned it a long time ago because
>> most keys where never reviewed.
>>
>> Now something I'm wondering is do you think it would be possible to
>> have 1) for some languages (English, French and other languages with
>> people that would be willing be official reviewers) and 2) for others
>> where less people are active ?
>
> Yes it's totally possible and probably a good idea.

I’m not sure it’s a good idea (I wouldn’t like it). If we have official reviewers, they can review the commits from the PRs.

Also they would need to be very active (more active than the release process) which is hard to sync. This is why I’d prefer that they review the already committed stuff (and we do rollbacks/new changes in the unlikely case when there are problems) so that they don’t block the flow.

But don’t get excited. We’ve never had this over 14 years of the XWiki project… so unlikely to happen ;)

It also makes it complex to have several processes.

So I’d be -0/-1 if we had to vote on this (until we become a much larger community).

Thank
-Vincent

>
>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> So only managers can review translations?
>>> There isn't a voting process? Like if 2 independent normal users validate a
>>> translation to be correct, that translation could auto validate itself?
>>>
>>> Option 2 seems the only option, because it allows Release Managers to
>>> validate multiple keys at the same time and it's similar to the current
>>> release process.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Caty
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>
>>>> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/>
>>>> as
>>>> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
>>>> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
>>>> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
>>>> Pros:
>>>>  - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
>>>> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>>>>  - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>>>>  - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
>>>> PRs
>>>> Cons:
>>>>  - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
>>>> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>>>>  - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
>>>> (and we can't group them)
>>>>
>>>> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
>>>> Pros:
>>>>  - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>>>>  - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
>>>> Cons:
>>>>  - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
>>>> don't need to)
>>>>  - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
>>>> (no locking/suggestions)
>>>>  - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>>>>
>>>> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
>>>> everything can be checked on the PR.
>>>> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
>>>> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
>>>> platform.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Adel
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thomas Mortagne

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Brainstorming] How should we review translations?

Adel Atallah
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Vincent Massol <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>> On 18 May 2018, at 10:39, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Mortagne
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> 1) is probably nice when you have dedicated reviewer for each language
>>> but we are far from this situation. We used to have the same review
>>> process in l10n.xwiki.org but we abandoned it a long time ago because
>>> most keys where never reviewed.
>>>
>>> Now something I'm wondering is do you think it would be possible to
>>> have 1) for some languages (English, French and other languages with
>>> people that would be willing be official reviewers) and 2) for others
>>> where less people are active ?
>>
>> Yes it's totally possible and probably a good idea.
>
> I’m not sure it’s a good idea (I wouldn’t like it). If we have official reviewers, they can review the commits from the PRs.
>
> Also they would need to be very active (more active than the release process) which is hard to sync. This is why I’d prefer that they review the already committed stuff (and we do rollbacks/new changes in the unlikely case when there are problems) so that they don’t block the flow.
>
> But don’t get excited. We’ve never had this over 14 years of the XWiki project… so unlikely to happen ;)
>
> It also makes it complex to have several processes.
>
> So I’d be -0/-1 if we had to vote on this (until we become a much larger community).
>
> Thank
> -Vincent
>

We might have some translations that we are sure doesn't need any
changes. We can lock the translations only for those strings (and not
for an entire language) and enable suggestions only. Even if we
probably won't get spammed, it could be safer that way.

>>
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> So only managers can review translations?
>>>> There isn't a voting process? Like if 2 independent normal users validate a
>>>> translation to be correct, that translation could auto validate itself?
>>>>
>>>> Option 2 seems the only option, because it allows Release Managers to
>>>> validate multiple keys at the same time and it's similar to the current
>>>> release process.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Caty
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Adel Atallah <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> As you probably know, we have decided to use Weblate <https://weblate.org/>
>>>>> as
>>>>> our new translation platform (l10n.xwiki.com). We still need to make some
>>>>> decisions before making an official announcement to the community.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to know here how we should deal with translation reviews.
>>>>> I'm thinking of two ways to review translations:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Reviewing directly on the Weblate platform
>>>>> Pros:
>>>>>  - Users can only make suggestions for already approved translations
>>>>> (which means we'll only have approved translations in the commits)
>>>>>  - We can compare the translated keys to the source one (English)
>>>>>  - We could push commits directly on the git repository instead of making
>>>>> PRs
>>>>> Cons:
>>>>>  - AFAICS we can only review one translation key at a time (and overall
>>>>> the review process seems to be quite hard)
>>>>>  - It seems that we receive an email for each new suggestions/translations
>>>>> (and we can't group them)
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Reviewing on Github (with PRs)
>>>>> Pros:
>>>>>  - We can review everything in a single view (github diff)
>>>>>  - We know exactly what we are merging in the repository
>>>>> Cons:
>>>>>  - Can't see the English source next to the translation (even if we mostly
>>>>> don't need to)
>>>>>  - It's harder to manage spam as people could change every translations
>>>>> (no locking/suggestions)
>>>>>  - You'll have to go on Weblate and revert rejected keys (one by one)
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in favor of option 2 as it's the simplest and the safest one as
>>>>> everything can be checked on the PR.
>>>>> If you need to see how reviews are being made on Weblate, I can probably
>>>>> send screenshots or just give, for some of you, manager rights on the
>>>>> platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Adel
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thomas Mortagne
>