Move to Crowdin

[kreuvf]

I just saw de1742a3b14dce2038240df34ebd2532bbca5fcd and related commits.

Could someone point me to related discussions? To me, it seems @past-due decided that everyone should get a Crowdin account and work on the translation catalogs that way. I'm sure it's not like that. Maybe someone can shed some light on this.

PS: I realize this work is put into a separate branch.

[past-due]

In consultation with other developers and project leads, we are testing Crowdin integration (as you noted, in a separate branch).

We're looking to enable additional people to easily contribute to and collaborate over translations - most translations are in need of contributions and work. And if the goal is to move to a more frequent beta / release cadence, as many have requested, we need to better ensure translations are kept up-to-date.

While you may be comfortable editing .po files directly, many people aren't (and we still see broken .po files submitted). Comparing changes / merging .po files can be annoying (certainly with a simple diff, depending on changes to source file / translation string ordering). Additionally, conversations / discussion over individual string translations (and possible alternatives / phrasing / etc) could benefit from a setup built for more collaboration. (And with more tools to catch mistakes.)

We're testing to see exactly what Crowdin enables, how it enables it, and how it works with existing workflows. There's not a lot of point in asking for feedback prior to testing, because there's no decision to be made until testing has indicated it's an option worth considering for the project.

So just to be clear: no decisions have been made.

I'd be interested in hearing about your current workflow for editing the .po files (it seems that Crowdin lets you download / upload .po files if you want to make changes with external software, but that's one of the things we're looking to test). But the forums might be a better place for that sort of discussion? (Closing this GitHub issue for now - I think we're trying to keep this to bug reports about the game itself.)

[kreuvf]

In consultation with other developers and project leads, we are testing Crowdin integration (as you noted, in a separate branch).

Could you provide me with the exact names? Is this discussion documented somewhere? I'd really like to read up on this.

We're testing to see exactly what Crowdin enables, how it enables it, and how it works with existing workflows. There's not a lot of point in asking for feedback prior to testing, because there's no decision to be made until testing has indicated it's an option worth considering for the project.

While I see what Crowdin will enable (and I certainly like that), I fear that people would be coerced into using Crowdin exclusively.

I'd be interested in hearing about your current workflow for editing the .po files (it seems that Crowdin lets you download / upload .po files if you want to make changes with external software, but that's one of the things we're looking to test). But the forums might be a better place for that sort of discussion?

Very recently, I switched to discussions on GitHub in PRs (using my clone of the repo for now). It allows you to discuss every change in detail. Less tech-savvy people can just send me their de.po and I'll make a branch for discussion. When everything is agreed upon, I'll prepare new commits (~one per author) with everything and create a new PR against this repo. I wonder whether I will still be able to handle the de.po just on Git outside of Crowdin.

(Closing this GitHub issue for now - I think we're trying to keep this to bug reports about the game itself.)

If there is a more appropriate place for this discussion, please tell me where and we can move this.

PS: Thank you for the quick reply. :)

[past-due]

In consultation with other developers and project leads, we are testing Crowdin integration (as you noted, in a separate branch).

Could you provide me with the exact names? Is this discussion documented somewhere? I'd really like to read up on this.

It was on IRC, and I'm afraid it was a while ago (although confirmed with vexed more recently that it was worth testing out).

Another big goal is trying to automate as much of everything as possible (and reducing maintenance / upkeep burden on the very limited time of currently-active volunteers). Crowdin provides a lot of helpful sanity checks (and makes it very easy to catch and fix errors in the translation strings). If we want to continue to speed up release cadence, and improvements, without things breaking left and right, it has some pretty useful tools.

We're testing to see exactly what Crowdin enables, how it enables it, and how it works with existing workflows. There's not a lot of point in asking for feedback prior to testing, because there's no decision to be made until testing has indicated it's an option worth considering for the project.

While I see what Crowdin will enable (and I certainly like that), I fear that people would be coerced into using Crowdin exclusively.

I'd be interested in hearing about your current workflow for editing the .po files (it seems that Crowdin lets you download / upload .po files if you want to make changes with external software, but that's one of the things we're looking to test). But the forums might be a better place for that sort of discussion?

Very recently, I switched to discussions on GitHub in PRs (using my clone of the repo for now). It allows you to discuss every change in detail. Less tech-savvy people can just send me their de.po and I'll make a branch for discussion. When everything is agreed upon, I'll prepare new commits (~one per author) with everything and create a new PR against this repo. I wonder whether I will still be able to handle the de.po just on Git outside of Crowdin.

I believe you can upload/download .po files from Crowdin - so even if the (hypothetical) ultimate decision were "we'd like to have everything moving through Crowdin to help keep track of changes prior to upstreaming to the GitHub repo" (again, purely hypothetical), I believe you'd be able to simply replace the final "create a PR on the main repo" step in your workflow with an "upload the de.po file to Crowdin" step.

(Crowdin would then handle syncing everything up.)

And, if you wanted, all that discussion (and managing contributions) could happen on Crowdin (and you don't even need a separate account login - you can login with a GitHub account) - but there's no reason that's required. (It does seem to be really handy for discussing individual translations, though.)

(Closing this GitHub issue for now - I think we're trying to keep this to bug reports about the game itself.)

If there is a more appropriate place for this discussion, please tell me where and we can move this.

PS: Thank you for the quick reply. :)

Maybe the Development section of the forum? (A lot of other translation topics are there.)

[comradekingu]

@kreuvf Having a Crowdin account means accepting their tracking and profiling, and having it sold to advertisers and data collection agencies, as described in the Crowdin terms of service. The better choice would be to go with Hosted Weblate, which has better translators and a lot more activity. :)

[kreuvf]

@comradekingu Any specific points? The TOS look pretty standard to me.

[past-due]

The TOS is pretty standard. (See the definitions at the top - example: "Client Data".)

The Privacy Policy is also pretty standard. Like most sites, including GitHub, you can toggle whatever email notifications you want to receive.

EDIT: Looks like @comradekingu is also one of the top contributors to Weblate. Which is awesome ("Go open-source!"), but might mean he isn't exactly unbiased. 😇

[comradekingu]

@past-due I am also one of the top users of both Weblate, Crowdin, and Transifex, but you instead looked up my contributions on GitHub. I have stopped using Crowdin and Transifex, ever since they updated their terms to be even more egregious following EU-GDPR.

I think it a much better past-time than to detail my contributions in any sense, is to at-least read https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-meet/issues/5056#issuecomment-612239691 which details https://support.crowdin.com/privacy-policy/ , and then https://downloads.crowdin.com/docs/DPA-singed.pdf and https://support.crowdin.com/cookies/

I don't blame you, it is a long and purposely complicated set of documents. However "standard" it is, you will find the egregious parts wrt. freedom and exploitation are not reflected in the Weblate TOS as perhaps a rare occurrence, but in the interest of avoiding them is all that is needed.

Furthermore, applying for gratis hosting for libre software is actually possible with Weblate, whereas Crowdin requires projects to be non-commercial in the monetary sense to to so. You can't elect to not contribute to the closed TM on Crowdin when doing so as another difference to be pointed out.

You will gain a translator by going with Weblate, and from my experience, including the thread I linked to, will lose them with Crowdin, and other similar options.

[past-due]

@past-due I am also one of the top users of both Weblate, Crowdin, and Transifex, but you instead looked up my contributions on GitHub.

@comradekingu: Said contributions are relevant context that's worth disclosing - as is your usage of all of those tools, so thank you for mentioning it.

I have stopped using Crowdin and Transifex, ever since they updated their terms to be even more egregious following EU-GDPR.

I think it a much better past-time than to detail my contributions in any sense, is to at-least read jitsi/jitsi-meet#5056 (comment) which details https://support.crowdin.com/privacy-policy/ , and then https://downloads.crowdin.com/docs/DPA-singed.pdf and https://support.crowdin.com/cookies/

I don't blame you, it is a long and purposely complicated set of documents.

Having read the source documents, I appreciate your linked comments. I can't say I agree with all of your characterizations or concerns, nor how you've interpreted the language, but you are certainly free to pick what accounts you're willing to have, and what services you are willing to use.

However "standard" it is, you will find the egregious parts wrt. freedom and exploitation are not reflected in the Weblate TOS as perhaps a rare occurrence, but in the interest of avoiding them is all that is needed.

The Weblate TOS is indeed refreshingly short & simple, and should be commended for that.

I can't say I agree with all of your characterizations of other TOSes.

You will gain a translator by going with Weblate, and from my experience, including the thread I linked to, will lose them with Crowdin, and other similar options.

Our experience in this regard differs - we've seen a massive increase in high-quality translator contributions (and translators) since the move to Crowdin, and a lot of positive feedback.

Of course, everyone is free to contribute to whatever they desire - that's the beauty of open source.

And on that note, I think we've perhaps gone a little far afield of an issue that was closed a while ago, based on decisions made (and substantial integration work completed) a while ago, and that has been in-place and working well for a while now. I'd encourage you to keep an eye on anything that interests you going forward. Cheers!