[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Kuwait Linux proposal
- To: core at arabeyes dot org
- Subject: Re: Kuwait Linux proposal
- From: Isam Bayazidi <bayazidi at arabeyes dot org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 22:52:55 +0200
- User-agent: KMail/1.4.3
On Wednesday 30 October 2002 16:07, Mohammed Elzubeir wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 03:44:20PM +0200, Isam Bayazidi wrote:
> > Salam ..
> > I guess you read Kuwait Linux's email .. here is a glimpse of what they
> > said:
> A glimpse? How about the full message ;)
Sorry .. I thought that I sent it to arch .. but it seems that I sent it to a
mistaken address .. it should be now in arch ..
> > > Following the SOS message you posted last two days, we decided to
> > > participate in the translation of KDE 3.1. For this aim, we will
> > > establish enshallah an Arabization department with a number of
> > > dedicated full-time translators and one or more programmers to finish
> > > the translation within 2 to three moths. This department will be under
> > > my supervesion. What we would like to emphasis here is that Kuwait
> > > Linux will participate in the translation provided that:
> > > 1) KDE mentions "Kuwait Linux" in the list of translators on their web
> > > site 2) Arabeyes mentions "Kuwait Liux" in the list of translators on
> > > their web site.
> > Here is my thoughts about it:
> > - If the quality of their translation is good I guess that this is a very
> > good offer.
> > - About mentioning Kuwait Linux in the KDE translators page. There is no
> > such page in KDE .. the page in KDE indicate the coordinators and there
> > is Elzubeirs name and my name .. what we can tell them, that they can add
> > their name in the PO files that they work on.. as in most PO files there
> > is a string for Translator's name, and email .. this name and email shows
> > in the
> They can the translator's name, and not the company/group's name. I would
> also not list them on the KDE page -- unnecessary fragmentation. Besides,
> from an Arabeyes point of view -- we want companies such as this to be
> satisfied with association with Arabeyes. In other words, Linux Kuwait
> would like to receive something in return to their investment (and
> rightfully so). Pointing to Arabeyes and saying they have participated in
> that, should be, satisfying (we should be that good ;). So we have to at
> least be convincing, and speak from that point when we receive requests
> such as this.
> > About box of that application when it is using the Arabic Interface.
> > - About Mentioning Kuwait Linux in Arabeyes translator's list .. no harm
> > with that .. after all, all translators have their name in the list,
> > either they are individuals or companies.
> Sure. If they have people working full-time, that is considered a
> 'private-sector'-support to Arabeyes. The least we can do is give them a
> little mention on the KDE-i18n page and a 'related links' link.
> > Issues to consider:
> > - Arabeyes will be the only one with the access to the KDE CVS for the
> > kde-i18n-ar module, meaning that the last commit is for Arabeyes from
> > Arabeyes.
> Most certainly. We are still very much in 'centralization' mode. Simply
> stress the fact that we are doing all this to maintain a centralized
> > - Kuwait Linux will be part of the translators team, in the doc list,
> > working and coordinating with other translators.
> > - They should use the Arabeyes CVS, branching splitting is not something
> > that is advised.
> Agreed. All this will and must be done by the localization coordinator (be
> it you or someone else -- and for that matter, the l10n coordinator may
> delegate project-specific roles to anyone he/she deems appropriate).
> > - They are urged to look upon the KDE documentation (after finishing KDE
> > Interface), and Gnome Arabic Translation Project.
> Let's just let them do what they have offered and see if they deliver
> > Here is some of my thoughts .. it would be really helpful if this works,
> > but hopfully with the atmosphere of coordination..
> This is generally excellent news ;) Of course, we can always try to
> compromise, but I think the above is quite reasonable.