[WG: I18N & L10N] Suggestion for improvement of i18n and L10n handling in JIRA

DAVID ROLDAN MARTINEZ darolmar at upvnet.upv.es
Wed Mar 21 05:37:46 PDT 2012 

+1

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Beth Kirschner [mailto:bkirschn at umich.edu] 
Enviado el: miércoles, 21 de marzo de 2012 13:26
Para: Jean-Francois Leveque
CC: sakai-dev Developers; i18n at collab.sakaiproject.org; DAVID ROLDAN MARTINEZ; Shoji Kajita
Asunto: Re: Suggestion for improvement of i18n and L10n handling in JIRA

+1

On Mar 20, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Jean-Francois Leveque wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I think we can work out the other details later.
> 
> Any opposition to the creation of the Translation component?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> J-F
> 
> On 08/03/2012 11:39, Jean-Francois Leveque wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> If David thinks it's a good idea to keep an Internationalization and 
>> add a Translation component, I think we might be able to reach a solution.
>> 
>> I nevertheless think Internationalization and Translation issues 
>> should not be automatically assigned to an i18n team. As long and the 
>> component that contains the issue is still maintained, I think issues 
>> should be assigned to the maintainers.
>> 
>> If there's an i18n team, it should be there to help the tool 
>> maintainers, not just doing the i18n work.
>> 
>>> Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and 
>>> he will eat for a lifetime.
>>> Confucius, K'ung Fu-tzu, K'ung-tzu, Kong Zi, Kong Qiu, Zhong Ni 
>>> Circa 551 - 479
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> Is there a way to do this with JIRA, like having no automatic 
>> assignment for the Internationalization and Translation components 
>> which could lead to issues being assigned to the team maintaining the 
>> code that contains the issue?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> J-F
>> 
>> On 17/02/2012 19:58, DAVID ROLDAN MARTINEZ wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> And how about to create a sub-team inside CLE/MT Team to handle i18n 
>>> issues and assigning automatically tickets with Internationalization 
>>> component set and adding a Translation component to tickets?
>>> 
>>> This will allow you to vet issues and update components (if 
>>> necessary) but also will allow "i18n team" to differentiate between 
>>> i18n (Internationalization component) and L10n (Translation 
>>> component) not loosing then the ability to identify issues. 
>>> Additionally, i18n team would be able to share your workload helping you to handle i18n issues.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> David
>>> ________________________________________
>>> De: sakai-dev-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>> [sakai-dev-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] En nombre de Beth 
>>> Kirschner [bkirschn at umich.edu] Enviado el: viernes, 17 de febrero de 
>>> 2012 16:08
>>> Para: Shoji Kajita; Jean-Francois Leveque
>>> CC: sakai-dev Developers
>>> Asunto: Re: [Building Sakai] Suggestion for improvement of i18n and 
>>> L10n handling in JIRA
>>> 
>>> I guess the real question is what is the problem we're trying to 
>>> solve? Jean-Francois mentioned that the auto-assign of I18N issues 
>>> sometimes requires me to re-assign the owner -- this really isn't a 
>>> huge inconvenience and sometimes allows me to vet issues and update 
>>> components if incorrect. Jean-Francois also proposes adding two new 
>>> checkboxes that differentiate between L10N and I18N -- I guess I 
>>> worry that people may not find or understand these checkboxes.
>>> 
>>> The "Maintenance Team" checkbox has fallen into dis-use, with the 
>>> "assigned to" field more consistently reflecting a "Maintenance Team"
>>> issue (now called CLE team, since all CLE developer's are now 
>>> considered de-facto members of the CLE/Maintenance Team). If a field 
>>> isn't required, I suspect many will not fill it in. I wouldn't want 
>>> to see us losing the ability to identify I18N/L10N issues.
>>> 
>>> - Beth
>>> 
>>> On Feb 10, 2012, at 9:12 PM, Shoji Kajita wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Beth,
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for your swift reaction. Then, what shall we do?
>>>> 
>>>> So far, Jean-Francois's suggestion is most reasonable for me.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Shoji
>>>> 
>>>> At Wed, 8 Feb 2012 11:55:58 -0500,
>>>> Beth Kirschner wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Shoji,
>>>>> 
>>>>> No problem -- I jumped the gun and have reverted the JIRA 
>>>>> component to read "Internationalization".
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Beth
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 6, 2012, at 3:44 AM, Shoji Kajita wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Beth,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I found that "x-internationalization" you are proposing has been 
>>>>>> already available on Jira.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think it is not a good solution because:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1. it is NOT matching for "internationalization" (Jira tells me 
>>>>>> "No Matches" when I'm typing in Component/s field in creating a 
>>>>>> Jira issue so that almost nobody can use),
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2. we haven't reached the conclusion.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please continue our discussion to find a better solution.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Shoji
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> At Thu, 2 Feb 2012 10:43:10 -0500, Beth Kirschner wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> How about we try for a low-tech hack of changing the I18N 
>>>>>>> component to sort alphabetically to the end -- 
>>>>>>> ("x-Internationalization"). This will make sure the primary 
>>>>>>> component owners get assigned?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> - Beth
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 2, 2012, at 7:11 AM, Jean-Francois Leveque wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> All the CLE internationalization component issues are currently 
>>>>>>>> automagically assigned to Beth Kirschner (Lead for this 
>>>>>>>> component in
>>>>>>>> JIRA) if the real component name is after Internationalization 
>>>>>>>> in alphabetical order. She then assigns most of the issues to 
>>>>>>>> the real component owner. I don't think this is really convenient.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Internationalization and translation issues are currently mixed 
>>>>>>>> in the internationalization component. There is no way to know 
>>>>>>>> the ones are internationalization from the ones that are 
>>>>>>>> translation.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> A better solution for both issues is welcome if my suggestion 
>>>>>>>> is not good enough.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> J-F
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 17:35, Aaron Zeckoski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> That doesn't really sound easier to me and there are getting 
>>>>>>>>> to be an awful lot of checkboxes there. The current filters 
>>>>>>>>> should do exactly what you want without a lot of work to make 
>>>>>>>>> this change in JIRA.
>>>>>>>>> -AZ
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Jean-Francois Leveque 
>>>>>>>>> <jean-francois.leveque at upmc.fr> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Currently, SAK issues can have internationalization in the 
>>>>>>>>>> list of components.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> AFAICT, the only real internationalization component has been 
>>>>>>>>>> in kernel since the creation of kernel with Sakai 2.6.0.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Currently the JIRA internationalization component is used 
>>>>>>>>>> both for L10n and i18n issues.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I suggest we stop using this component and add 2 new 
>>>>>>>>>> check-boxes (like the Maintenance Team Issue one):
>>>>>>>>>> Internationalization Issue
>>>>>>>>>> Localization Issue
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> It seems to me this way will be easier to check which 
>>>>>>>>>> languages have been updated or to look for 
>>>>>>>>>> internationalization issues.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> What do you think ?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> J-F
> 
> 
> --
> Jean-François Lévêque
> Responsable technique Sakai
> Université Pierre et Marie Curie
> 
> --
> Jean-Francois Leveque
> Australe (local Sakai CLE) CTO
> University Pierre and Marie Curie
> France

More information about the i18n mailing list