Calendar: Locale Trees for Lightning 1.0 and Beyond

[Philipp Kewisch]

I'd like to announce our plans for the localization of Lightning for
1.0 and beyond. I've done my best to make the process as little work
for the localizers as possible, so please excuse if the naming and
repos don't currently match whats usual for Firefox and Thunderbird. I
promise this will change for the following releases though.

=== Lightning 1.0 ===
First of all, lets focus on Lightning 1.0 which is due November 8th.
As with the last two releases, we will be using l10n-miramar [1]. The
main reason for this is that we've taken great care to not change any
strings for 1.0b7 and the upcoming 1.0 release. Note however, the tree
to compare with is not comm-miramar, but rather *comm-beta*. This may
be a bit confusing, but be assured this name clash will go away after
the release. Currently, 38 locales are green and only 11 are red. I
would love to see a few more locales going green for 1.0. How about
it? According to the current state of the l10n dashboard [2], here's a
list of the missing locales. Maybe you can help out? If so, please
visit one of the l10n team pages and contact the team leaders there:

* ar: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:ar
* bg: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:bg
* ko: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:ko
* pt-BR: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:pt-BR
* vi: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:vi
* si: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:si
* ta-LK: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:ta-LK
* ro: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:ro
* he: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:he
* ka: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:ka
* mk: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Teams:mk

If you already localize for any of these locales and you know
everything is translated, please request sign-off again to make sure
it shows up as green on the dashboard.

=== Lightning next ===
The following information is **not relevant for Lightning 1.0** We
haven't agreed on version numbers, but we do have l10n trees and will
be leaving l10n-miramar after the release. Given Lightning has a
binary component and needs to re-release every time that Thunderbird
does, it makes sense for us get aboard the release train too. You can
see the l10n trees here:


== cal_beta: currently not relevant, but will be after the merge on
November 8th ==
* l10n tree: https://l10n-stage-sj.mozilla.org/shipping/dashboard?tree=cal_beta
* l10n repo: http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/l10n/mozilla-beta
* en-US repo: http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/comm-beta

== cal_aurora: compares with the current comm-aurora, or the release
due December 20th ==
* l10n tree: https://l10n-stage-sj.mozilla.org/shipping/dashboard?tree=cal_aurora
* l10n repo: http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/l10n/mozilla-aurora
* en-US repo: http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/comm-aurora

== cal_central: compares with the current comm-central, or the release
due January 31st ==
* l10n tree: https://l10n-stage-sj.mozilla.org/shipping/dashboard?tree=cal_central
* l10n repo: http://hg.mozilla.org/l10n-central
* en-US repo: http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central

If you have any questions, please do let me know via reply or email me
directly.

[1] https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/l10n-miramar
[2] https://l10n-stage-sj.mozilla.org/dashboard/?tree=calendar10x

[Axel Hecht]

On 11.10.11 14:21, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
> I'd like to announce our plans for the localization of Lightning for
> 1.0 and beyond. I've done my best to make the process as little work
> for the localizers as possible, so please excuse if the naming and
> repos don't currently match whats usual for Firefox and Thunderbird. I
> promise this will change for the following releases though.
>
> === Lightning 1.0 ===
> First of all, lets focus on Lightning 1.0 which is due November 8th.
> As with the last two releases, we will be using l10n-miramar [1]. The
> main reason for this is that we've taken great care to not change any
> strings for 1.0b7 and the upcoming 1.0 release. Note however, the tree
> to compare with is not comm-miramar, but rather *comm-beta*. This may
> be a bit confusing, but be assured this name clash will go away after
> the release.

Is it a problem that the l10n-dashboard compares against comm-miramar
for the calendar10x tree? Should that switch over or is that not an
issue due to the string freeze?

Axel

[Philipp Kewisch]

To be safe you could move it over, but since we haven't changed any
strings between miramar and now, it should be fine.

Thanks for the note!
Philipp

[Mark Banner]

On 11/10/2011 19:58, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
> To be safe you could move it over, but since we haven't changed any
> strings between miramar and now, it should be fine.

Except that locales may or may not have moved strings across from
comm-miramar to comm-beta, so it would be best to keep everything in sync.

Mark.

[Philipp Kewisch]

As I understood it, this is only the tree it compares against? So its
currently comparing l10n-miramar against comm-miramar.

Philipp

[Jesper Kristensen]

If you are going to switch repositories from the version based like
miramar to the channel based central/aurora/beta, I think it might be
better to do it sooner rather than later. Because:

* Localizers who wish to update their localizations will no longer need
to deal with the old version-based repositories.
* There are no English string changes, so the repository switch can
happen at a quiet time where we don't need to localize new strings.

At least for my locale, we have committed fixes to our Lightning
localization since the last release to the aurora repository, because
that is where we work for all the other Mozilla applications. I don't
think it is worth the time to get these fixes into the old miramar
repository, so these fixes will not be part of Lightning 1.0, if
localizations are taken from miramar.

[Philipp Kewisch]

While I do understand your concerns, this would mean at least three
locales have to transplant their changes from l10n-miramar to
l10n/mozilla-beta. Any way I go this means work for someone :-)

Copying changes should only be a matter of checking out both repos,
copying over the directory and then committing and pushing the changes
on l10n-miramar.

Philipp

[Axel Hecht]

Right, my comment was merely about the en-US repo. I'd rather not bother
personally, but if you want to, I can remap them.

Axel

[Philipp Kewisch]

I'll just keep it in mind in case we do add strings, which is unlikely.

-p

[Rimas Kudelis]

2011.10.11 23:45, Philipp Kewisch rašė:
> While I do understand your concerns, this would mean at least three
> locales have to transplant their changes from l10n-miramar to
> l10n/mozilla-beta.

Which they will have to do anyway. The only question is when.

If that is the only reason why you chose to go with miramar, I suggest
you reevaluate it. ;)

Rimas

[Philipp Kewisch]

On 10/12/11 9:18 PM, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
> Which they will have to do anyway. The only question is when.
>
> If that is the only reason why you chose to go with miramar, I suggest
> you reevaluate it. ;)

I wouldn't want to risk losing 3 locales for 1.0, but I guess I could do
some comparisons between beta and miramar to check out the differences
and contact the localizers where differences occur. What we want to
avoid is a lot of back and forth though.

Philipp

[Rimas Kudelis]

My point was, you could ask those three teams to commit their changes to
beta, and use that. They will have to do this eventually anyway, so why
not now? :) And only if they don't reply or fail to commit their
changes, you could resort to using miramar for them.

Rimas