[Python-Dev] Translated Python documentation

Ned Deily nad at python.org
Thu Mar 9 18:35:55 EST 2017


[catching up on an older thread]

On Feb 27, 2017, at 05:31, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-02-25 19:19 GMT+01:00 Brett Cannon <brett at python.org>:
>> It's getting a little hard to tease out what exactly is being asked at this
>> point. Perhaps it's time to move the discussion over to a translation SIG
>> (which probably needs to be created unless the old
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/i18n-sig makes sense)? That way
>> active translators can figure out exactly what they want to ask of
>> python-dev in terms of support and we can have a more focused discussion.
> 
> Things are already happening in the background on other lists and
> other Python projects, but the problem is that the translation project
> seems "blocked" for some reasons. That's why I started the thread.
> 
> Example of a recent CPython PR, blocked:
> https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/195
> "bpo-28331: fix "CPython implementation detail:" label is removed when
> content is translated." opened 7 days ago by INADA Naoki (JP
> translation)
> 
> Example of  a docsbuild PR:
> https://github.com/python/docsbuild-scripts/pull/8
> "[WIP] Add french, japanese, and chinese", opened at 12 Dec 2016 by
> Julien Palard (FR translation)
> 
> See also Julien Palard's threads on python-ideas: no decision was
> taken, so the project is blocked.
> 
> According to this thread, there is an official GO for official
> translations, so these PR should be merged, right?

I don't know exactly what you mean by an "official GO" but I don't think there has been any agreement yet since there hasn't been a specific proposal yet to review.  I think what *was* agreed is that, in principle, translation *sounds* like a good idea to follow up on elsewhere, i.e. on one of the existing sigs, and then come back with a specific proposal for review.  Thinking about that a little more, I think the appropriate output of those discussions should be a process PEP.  Then we can review the proposal properly and also have the process clearly documented for the future.

--
  Ned Deily
  nad at python.org -- []



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list