Re: Multi-language to be or not to be

On 2/14/07, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>
> - --On Tuesday, February 13, 2007 20:18:27 +0100 Magnus Hagander
> <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>
> > ok.
> > If we're doing this, we should definitely decide so *before* the French
> > and German guys who just said they might do it get started.
>
> Ya, the feel I got from those 'non-English' that have participated in this
> thread wasn't that the current way was difficult, but that they just couldnt'
> find the documentation for it ... again, my impression was that once they were
> able to find that, they were eager to get moving ...

The translation interface is not a confusing mess of unusable junk. It has some
problems but this doesn't mean that it must be rewritten from scratch :

- it's poorly advertised : the fact that the site can be translated
needs to be
clearly mentioned on the website, not only sporadically on pgsql-www .

- setting up a local copy of the website is tricky ( the installation
readme is probably
missing some details ).

- keeping the content up to date is difficult at the moment because
tracking the
changes needs to be done manually by watching the CVS commits.

The first two points have nothing to do with the exact implementation: the new
one can also be widely unknown ...

So: we can start translating using the current infrastructure. The translated
content will not get lost even if later it becomes absolutely clear that the
infrastructure needs to be rewritten : importing the text content to the new
one will be possible one way or another .

Cheers,
Adrian Maier