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) <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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

Hi,

On 18 May 2018, at 10:39, Adel Atallah <[email protected]> wrote:

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> 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) <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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

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