launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Ask Hjorth Larsen <asklarsen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 1:03 AM, Lucian Adrian Grijincu
<lucian.grijincu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Clint Byrum <clint.byrum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Is a lot more appealing to people, as it has a clear value to anyone who
>> sees it. They're really only for the recipient though, as a source of
>> pride and instant feedback on what they've accomplished thus far.
>
>
> Exactly!
> I don't know where the others got the whole quality vs. quantity thing.
>
>
> Launchpad was more fun in the early days because in empowered small
> contributors. Some of them stayed along and became big contributors.
>
> In the past, before QA you came, you translated, you were proud.
> Quality was not that important.
>
>
> Now not so much.
>
> Now that QA teams have been enacted, small contributors perceive a
> barrier of entry and think their contributions are worth less:
> * you only add suggestions
> * you have to wait until a QA God reviews your translation
> * by the time they review the translation you already forgot about
> them and couldn't care less.
>
>
> I can give the example of the Romanian team. At first we translated as
> each saw fit. No emphasis on quality and many contributors.
>
> Fortunately GNOME-RO refused to accept translations without review and
> we learned about the conventions/terminology/glossary/etc. used in the
> rest of GNOME translations.
>
> We then started talking to other contributors and told them about
> those conventions, and they corrected their work.
>
> Then QA teams came in to enforce quality standards. QA team members
> are the contributors that applied these conventions and worked
> significantly more than other contributors.
>
>
> But some new contributors have told me that they walked away from
> translations with QA towards those that are free for anyone because
> they feel empowered there.
>
> I don't believe removing QA teams is a good idea, but I'm thinking
> about other ways to make small contributors feel more pride in their
> work and keep them more engaged.
> And I know badges and other similar non-intrusive notifications can
> have such an effect.
>
> Again, maybe the problem is elsewhere and I'm barking on the wrong tree here.

But if anyone can contribute, there will be unacceptably many errors,
and it won't be practically possible for a prospective QA team to keep
track of where they pop up.  Also the coordination with upstreams will
suffer badly.  I think QA teams are a necessity.

For a small team in need of contributors you can always lower the
entry requirements of the QA team, or possibly make the team open
(although that still requires a bit of clicking from the user).

You're right that first impressions are very important when dealing
with new translators.  What I would really like is a way to write
feedback when accepting/modifying the translations - that way the
translator will have an actual *person* writing.  If that doesn't show
(depending on how nice this person is, of course :)) that their
contributions are appreciated, nothing will.  Of course this also
requires a way to keep track of the most recent suggestions, otherwise
we can't see where these translators made their suggestions.

Regards
Ask