From Fedora Project Wiki

Plans

Here are some detailed plans on what we can do in the localization landscape. Maybe "ideas" is a better word. Mostly ideas specific to tools, gathered in mailing lists and at FOSS.in when a bunch of translators and developers gathered around.

Idea.png
These aren't official plans of the FLP, just a bunch of useful notes and food for thought.

Correct what's not working (fix)

Priority 1

  • Put Transifex into production at translate.fpo (100% complete)
  • (./) Add missing modules & branches, do some final checks
  • Announce (Fedora and lwn/foo)
  • (./) Make sure statistics and every piece of the puzzle works
  • Migrate users from elvis
  • (./) Mass-email elvis users to create Fedora accounts (/L10N/Join page is ready)
  • (./) IRC for help in registration process (sign CLA etc)

Priority 2

  • Add email notifications
  • For every commit, new module (or edit), notify related people
  • Expose public parts as RSS too
  • Enable all projects in Transifex
  • Contact hosted.fpo-hosted developers to add their project too (eg. opyum)
  • (./) Communicate with rest of elvis devs and urge them to move to Fedora infra
  • Enable Tx on both app servers
  • Add possibility to set flag with Tx (hold/release a package)


Increase efficiency (enhance)

Priority 1

  • Code high-level views for maintenance
  • Big table with registered modules, releases, branches
  • Same table for Tx but also test write access for each module/branch
  • SSH key overview/administration (admins)
  • Need maintenance resources for DL and Tx
  • DL: Keep in sync with upstream, convince them to do releases
  • DL+Tx: Make sure all branches/modules are there, all the time. This applies for all registered super-projects (Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, OLPC)
  • Move DL SQLite to mysql, have one app server to update the DB and the rest just their caches
  • Configure DL to get notifications for each commit from each VCS (probably via Tx) and update LIVE the module's statistics, instead of running the cron job every a few hours.
  • Separate Tx commit mechanism from web app to a separate process/service. (big project)
  • Benefits: Increased security (apache no access to the SSH keys), enable an upstream project to actually do the commit/push, Tx only requests the commits (good for GNOME, KDE, etc)
  • Increase verbosity in tools: Add more links and common info in both DL+Tx (eg. mention on the top of each page how to checkout and where from to checkin respectively, links to bugzilla and maintainers, etc).

Priority 2

  • Give more control to developers directly
  • Add web-based interface for developers to register their projects
  • Give them the ability to add a new branch to their module
  • Give Transifex access directly through the FAS (reduced overhead on Fedora Infra)
  • Expose repos: Give developers the ability to pull translations instead of having Tx push them
  • Build RPM for DL and push DL+Tx RPMs in Fedora Universe
  • Build a common model/configuration with DL (maintenance cost down).
  • Create similar models to DL in Tx. Experiment in running DL scripts to populate them. Goal: Not having to maintain two separate Views, configuration files, checked-out caches.


Add functionality (extend)

Priority 1

  • Implement VCS-agnostic CLI client to work independantly of the web interface (big project)
  • Eg. tx checkout --all and tx submit <proj> <branch> <file>
  • Somewhat related with Pootle integration
  • Could get integrated with kbabel, gtranslator, etc.
  • Pootle: Make it work with Transifex
  • See what is/isn't needed and customize accordingly
  • Install a test instance, even without Tx for specspo
  • RH Docs
  • Get in touch with folks to see if they could work closer with the community and leverage its throughput
  • Why not have the docs in some "unofficially supported" languages too?
  • Discuss with Debian community their needs and requirements
  • Test OpenID
  • Make Tx *completely* portable to any independent project that wants its resources localized

Priority 2

  • Fine-grain permissions in Tx: Language maintainers, approvals by proj/lang/branch, etc. Who owns what, who controls what.
  • Add ability to "hold" and "release" a project/branch, like in elvis
  • Start thinking big
  • Have language-specific and project-specific sub-domains, specific content for each

Community

  • Continue building groups, mailing lists, the community
  • Work better together with Ambassadors -- look at Ubuntu for "loco teams"
  • Send emails to -announce before every release
  • Give credits in all Fedora-is-upstream applications/docs
  • Bi-weekly meetings
  • Split specspo in chunks of reduced priority.
  • Also, make it work with rpm (spot)

Other ideas worth considering

  • JBOSS Docs, similar to RH Docs
  • Docs in general! LTSP? Manpages?