common terms po preliminary plan

[Arafat Medini <lumina at silverpen dot de>]

preleminary paper:

3. EVERY member must eventually work on ALL the files.
Lets imagine for the sake of simplicity there are only
5 files instead of 100.

Week1: Youcef works on file1, Arafat on file2, Ossama
file3, Abdulaziz file4, and Ahmed Zawawi file5.

Week2: Youcef takes file2, Arafat file3, Ossama
file4.... etc... and look at the work the previous
person has done. If we like their translations, we
leave it as it is. If we don't like a certain
translation, we add our own. We go on about this way
until EVERYONE has worked on EVERYTHING.

Here Nadims idea comes into the game. Everyone puts the word
he likes and his name too:

# QAC - Arafat, Ossama
  # QAC - Youcef
  msgid "Connected"
  msgstr "Trans-A"
  msgstr "Trans-B"

the person writes down its name even if it will not add any word. So
that we can know :Aha that person knows about it.

It would be important
though to have the names match the location of the term (ie. if you
are adding the third suggestion for a translation your name should
be the third '# QAC -' comment above it).


On voting now:

two ways are apparent:

Abdulaziz:

3. The votes are tallied. In case of a tie, it's the
Chief of Translation's vote that will be the deciding factor.

4. Once all members have voted the two translations
with most votes are kept and the others deleted.

5. That particular file is marked "finished" and
carried off to be merged with the master common_terms
po.

Nadim:

Once the file's deadline is up, you guys all get on IRC and make
final decisions on each term and trim the names and secondary
translations.

I'll take Abdulazizs idea here, BUT with an extension: in regards of
words with the following conditions:

+word with more then one translation

+word with 50% for and 50% against it

+word where I get a formal mail AGAINST it's usage

+word which is newly added to the database, for eg. words where there
isn't anywhere ANY translation for them.

for these words we make an irc meeting to vote for/against them.

Also: the coordinato'rs vote is counted as a normal vote, I (or every
other coordinator after me) has NO right to get ANY privilege in
determining which word will be opted for. If I am against a word I'll
have to write a formal letter to myself ;)

I think this system is simple, self-sufficient and
doesn't require massive coordination

mm, I also think so.

Arafat