>> My idea is defining "maintainer" for each README. Of course I am
>> ready for Japanese one.
> That would only cover part of the problem, and not on a permanent
> How do you notice that a README has changed?
Commit messages, obviously.
> How does the community know when the changes have been completely
> incorporated into the translation?
Why don't you worry about message translations then? Translation is a
human process and there's no way to guaranteer the translation is
> What do we do if we have README translations which haven't been
> updated when it's time to tag a release? Delete them? Leave old,
> misleading content?
I would say delete them. The reson for this is:
> If the mainter is too lazy, we would be
> able to remove the file before releasing new version. In another word,
> the released version of PostgreSQL will always have accurate README,
> which itself valuable for those who are in charge of maintaining older
> What if you move on to something else and are no longer active in
> the project?
> I think this needs a well-defined and sustainable *process*, not
> just a set of volunteers. I'm skeptical that a workable process can
> be devised, but I'm willing to be proven wrong.
Kevin, this is an open source project. Nobody can guarantee that
he/she can continute to contribute forever. If we are so worry about
this, we will never be able to accept any contribution at all.
BTW I will talk to some Japanese speaking developers about my idea if
community agree to add Japanese README to the source tree so that I am
not the only one who are contributing this project(I can commit that
my coworkers will help the project. However I prefer to gather
contributors outside my company in addition to inside my company since
this will bring more sustainable activity).
> Now, if someone wanted to set up a web site or Wiki page with
> translations, that would be up to them. I doubt anyone would object
> to a link from the Developer FAQ to such a page. It seems to me
> that this would provide most of the same benefit, without much in
> the way of a down side. It might be wise to go so far as to put a
> "last modified" date in each README (which would be copied without
> change into each translation which brought things up to date), so
> that it would be easy for someone looking at translation to
> determine whether it was current.
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-06-30 00:42:58|
|Subject: Re: default privileges wording|
|Previous:||From: Joe Conway||Date: 2011-06-30 00:34:40|
|Subject: Re: SECURITY LABEL on shared database object|