[Kde-i18n-fa] translation

[Arash Bijanzadeh]

On Saturday 15 March 2003 13:02, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> On Saturday 15 March 2003 10:11, Arash Bijanzadeh wrote:
> > > Well, with the current response that we are getting, I guess we have a
> > > couple of enthusiast and qualified people to join the project.
> > >
> > > If things progress in the same way, we will have a good and consistent
> > > team, capable of doing some really cool translation. in that case,
> > > maybe farsi in the next version of KDE will be much much better.
> > >
> > > Arash, how are you going to manage all these enthusiastic people? what
> > > are your plans and/or time frame?
> > >
> > > cheers
> >
> > First many thanx to all whom answered the request. But let's see the
> > reality a little bit. I recieved just 3 of them. and that's not "all
> > these people"! Well we are in a really better situation of last year, I
> > admit. Well I prefer to wait some other days to see if there would be
> > another answer then goto detail
>
> OK, we are in  a better position than last year, and that's good enough in
> my opinion.
mine too!
>
> > Anyway the first step is getting KDE>=3.0  up and running. then
> > installing kbabel and farsi font on machine.
> > I like any body that didn't do it already to do it ASAP. We are here to
> > help in case of any problem.
>
> once upon a time, getting KDE 3.0 up was a hard job. now that most recent
> versions of distro, it wouldn't be that much difficult to set up KDE 3.0
> and install Arial Unicode on it.  I would suggest using KDE 3.1 instead of
> KDE 3.0 for many reasons, first of all, it's much better, and second of
> all, you will get a feeling of how the translation is. ofcourse KDE 3.0
> would also do the job.
absolutely agree! I thought maybe installing the KDE3.1 is difficult for some 
people, regarding that REDHAT8.0 would be useless.
>
> > Just another thing:
> >
> > Aryan mentioned is another mail that we are better to debug our
> > translation first then go to new things. I completely disagree with it!
> > The nature of OS is continious debugging and it should not prevent us
> > from more developing - if we can call it developing -
>
> Though I can see your point arash, I still stick to my point. software is
> complex stuff. maybe it would be better for us to take another look at
> history and learn from it. Multics was supposed to be a great OS. GE, MIT,
> Bell, and many others worked on it for many years. But finally, it became
> bloated and they had to abandon the project all the effort that had gone
> into it.
>
> Although, I can't compare what we are doing here with Multics, still a
> developer should always maintain his software. simply going on, without
> looking back is not the way. is it?
Sure, I said continious debugging, didn't I? But we should not stop working on 
new stuff. It was I i was trying to say
Cheers
Arash