Akademy meeting notes

Karl Ove Hufthammer karl at huftis.org
Mon Sep 21 18:38:16 BST 2020

Yaron Shahrabani skreiv 20.09.2020 20:46:
> Regarding second class citizens: I would never advocate against a 
> collaborative technology just because I got used to something more 
> conservative.
> Obsolescence of old technologies is how most of us live (assuming 
> you're reading this message through the internet instead of using doves).

I love new and better technology! :)

I think our difference in opinion is partly caused by what we perceive 
as the ‘obsolete’ or the ‘better’ technology. For me, translating in 
Weblate is so incredible slow compared to translating in Lokalize (and 
the user interface of Weblate is IMHO much more confusing), and I have 
access to so few tools in Weblate that help me do proper QA, so having¹ 
to use Weblate is like moving *backwards* in technology. Or, using your 
analogy, it would be like being forced to use doves for communicating 
instead of e-mail, because doves is the new, exciting technology (*cloud 

¹ I know the plan is to have Weblate being optional. That’s good.

> I also believe that having a single interface for relevant commentary, 
> screenshots, suggestions, TM and glossary will improve the overall 
> translation quality and quantity while not affecting the more 
> conservative ways, BTW, there's no reason to deny Weblate as a 
> commentary system, it's not like it evades privacy, you can choose to 
> use it specifically for discussions and nothing more or at least 
> subscribe to the notifications to know what's going on.

I see your point, in that one can use Weblate as just a commentary 
(annotation) system. That could work, though I would still prefer 
metadata about translations to be stored in the translation files or in 
source code, so that they would be available for *all* tools, not just one.

Note that I’m not at all against having Weblate or a similar system as 
an *alternative*. I like that people can choose the editor they want. 
But the editor should ‘play nice’ with existing infrastructure and 

My ideal online translation system (for people who prefer to use an 
online client) is one which would interact *directly* with Git/SVN, 
i.e., just pull the latest PO files from Git/SVN, commit the result when 
the user saves (or at the end of the session), and store all data in the 
actual PO file (i.e., as translator comments). There would be no need 
for a separate database of strings, like Weblate uses. It would be just 
like another PO editor; the only difference would be that you would 
access it using your browser instead of accessing it through a normal 
application. (I’m thinking of something similar to this, non-free, I 
think, online PO editor, only with Git/SVN integration: 

> I think we can suggest a feature to send the relevant info to Bugzilla 
> to allow you to open a bug about that string (using the interface, not 
> automatically, maybe even develop such feature).

Are you talking a feature to send info to Bugzilla about a string or 
about a translation?

Karl Ove Hufthammer

More information about the kde-i18n-doc mailing list