search

apertium / organisation

Second point of contact for all things Apertium
https://apertium.org/
19 stars 6 forks source link

Bitrotted released langs/pairs #23

Open TinoDidriksen opened 3 years ago

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

Similar to https://github.com/apertium/organisation/issues/14 but focused on bitrot and other issues with released languages and pairs. Some just need a person to sign off that current state is releasable, but some need hands-on fixing.

Needs work

(checkbox denotes fixed or not)

Fixed

(checkbox denotes uploaded to Debian or not)

Existing release is usable

(checkbox denotes uploaded to Debian or not) Even if an existing release is usable, it should be republished in Debian with new version requirements. I will do this when I push everything onwards.

marcriera commented 3 years ago

Both apertium-ron and apertium-ron-cat build and work fine. They can be released.

Juanpabl commented 3 years ago

I was checking just today apertium-arg and confirm that looks and work better than the previous release. I see you just released it several minutes ago; so, great! Let me check the current versions of spa-arg and arg-cat

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

It's important to also check dependencies. E.g., spa-arg needs a release of spa and/or arg - or to build and run correctly with previous release of spa and/or arg. If existing spa v1.2.0 works, then that's great - if not, there's more coordination to be done to get the master branch into a state that's good for spa-arg.

Same goes for all the pairs on the list. It's a lot of work.

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

...confirm that looks and work better than the previous release. I see you just released it...

And just to clarify my workflow for the releases I make as part of this: I don't check quality, because I don't know these languages. If a given language or pair needs build system updates and only has what looks like harmless or beneficial commits, I'll just cut through and call that a new release.

So the ones remaining on the list are ones that to me look like a linguist needs to sign off on the current state.

jonorthwash commented 3 years ago

I think updates to apertium-kaz make apertium-kaz-tat less stable than it used to be. So forcing a new release seems not ideal as things currently stand. @IlnarSelimcan, thoughts?

jonorthwash commented 3 years ago

I think apertium-crh-tur was never perfect, so any changes made to it, apertium-crh, and apertium-tur probably don't hurt anything? @ftyers, thoughts?

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

Huh, kaz-tat does in fact build from the existing release. I'll remove that from the list.

IlnarSelimcan commented 3 years ago

On 4 January 2021 00:50:08 GMT+03:00, Jonathan Washington notifications@github.com wrote:

I think updates to apertium-kaz make apertium-kaz-tat less stable than it used to be.

That's correct. Kaz-tat is yet to be accommodated for the changes in apertium-kaz.

Ilnar

So forcing a new release seems not ideal as things

currently stand. @IlnarSelimcan, thoughts?

-- Простите за краткость, создано в K-9 Mail.

Juanpabl commented 3 years ago

I've been checking these days both apertium-arg-cat and apertium-spa-arg, fixing things to adapt to the current states of apertium-cat and apertium-spa. I also had to do modifications in apertium-arg.

Not only they compile, but testvocs are also ok, and the translators have improved since the last release. So, my preference would be: a) to release spa and cat in their current state (is this ok for everyone?) b) to add a new release of apertium-arg (even if it's only days after the previous one). There are no more pairs depending on it. c) to release the pairs apertium-spa-arg and apertium-arg-cat with dependencies to the releases in a) and b).

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

With the way releases are done now by bundling the exact version of dependencies, nobody else really has to agree on releasing apertium-spa or apertium-cat. I can cut a version as they are right now and have spa-arg and arg-cat depend on that exact one, and everyone else can move on with improving the languages independently.

Juanpabl commented 3 years ago

Then, that would be great (and also to have a new version of apertium-arg tagged). Tell me if I need to do anything else. Thanks!

Juanpabl commented 3 years ago

Could you also update both pairs in apertium.org? Thanks!

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

It'll have to wait a while. The whole release site setup needs to be redone, but it's not currently possible because the broken pairs won't build with latest versions - and conversely, the new pairs use new features. So it rather has to be done at a point where every released pair works, which isn't quite yet. But hey, only 8 pairs need fixing.

hectoralos commented 3 years ago

apertium-srd, apertium-ita and apertium-srd-ita are ready to be packed. They are indeed a new release on which we have work in the last 3+ months with quite a lot of corrections in the dictionaries, several thousands of new words, tons of new lexical rules and a few tens of new transfer rules.

hectoralos commented 3 years ago

apertium-cat-srd is ready to be packed. It needs two new releases of apertium-srd and apertium-cat (with minor changes).

gramirez-prompsit commented 3 years ago

I've been taking a look to apertium-spa-ita with the lastest version of apertium/lttoolbox/apertium-spa and apertium-ita. It compiles and it works. It is basically as it was some years ago. I introduced some fixes in the dixes, but it is still far from being testvoc clean. I'm not sure if it deserves a new release, if just for organisational purposes, then OK. I don't know how to make a release though.

TinoDidriksen commented 3 years ago

I've been taking a look to apertium-spa-ita with the lastest version of apertium/lttoolbox/apertium-spa and apertium-ita. It compiles and it works. It is basically as it was some years ago.

Good enough for me. I just need people to sign off on that current state isn't worse.