Test translation tooling for localizations

a-mccarthy commented 3 months ago

Breaking out from https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/45175 and https://github.com/kubernetes/website/discussions/45209, this issue focuses on forming a team to test out different TLMP tools for use to localize Kubernetes docs, including creating a prototype. Special thanks to @sftim for help reviewing the testing plan/requirements.

If you would like to participate, please respond by Monday, April 22nd with your interest.

Outcomes of the testing phase:

During this testing phase we'd like to identify the technical requirements necessary to integrate a TLMP such as Transifex or Crowdin into this kubernetes/website repository.

At the end of the phase we should have:

a working proof of concept that is accessible to the community and highlights localization workflows
detailed documentation outlining the findings of this testing, including:
- Use cases/workflows tested
- Tooling implementation requirements
- Long term support requirements
- (Protoype) testing team’s recommendation on tooling
(if applicable) evidence that the tooling evaluated isn't suitable and that there are insoluble barriers to adoption (unlikely, but this is a valid outcome even if it's not what we want)
a presentation to SIG Docs during a community call on the findings of this testing

Testing phase timeline

To be determined, depends on finding volunteers to help do the testing.

Volunteer deadline: April 22, 2024
Estimated testing phase length: 30 days
Kickoff meeting date: To be determined, based on availability of volunteers
Testing period:
- Start date: MM-DD-YYYY
- End Date: MM-DD-YYYY

Resources

To do the testing we'd like the following roles filled with folks from the community. The testing phase will last about 1 month and has light some time requires depending on the role you'd like to help out with (described below).

Volunteers for this testing should be is able to

read/write a language other than English
has some experience with our current localizing and reviewing processes
commit to helping for the entire testing phase. You wont necessarily have work for the entire time, but we'd ask that volunteers can commit to be responsive on slack and GitHub for the testing phase.
Volunteers should also be Kubernetes Github Org members.

If you have experience with these tools already, great! But you do not need to know anything about the tooling to be a volunteer here, having a new users experience is very valuable for our testing.

We'd also be interested in having a whole language team, or part of a team, participate in the testing. That way we'd be able to test the whole workflow, from localizing content, reviewing it, and "publishing" it.

Roles

TLMP administrator: We need two (or more) people to look after the prototype TLMP and either shut it down at the end of the prototype phase, or update it for adoption. The two person minimum comes from not wanting to rely on any single contributor; we could otherwise end up in a situation where we have a platform we can't manage. These contributors may also join a Google Group or similar, associated with the TLMP's owner identity.

Needed: two contributors
Time Commitment: 30 minutes - 1 hour per week split between the 2 admins (about 3 hours total during the testing phase)
1. [NAME - github]
2. [NAME - github]

Communication Lead: We need one person to lead communication for the testing. They will help share progress and highlight blockers for the testing teams. This person should be available to attend SIG meetings for sharing updates to SIG docs

Needed: one contributor
Time Commitment: 30 minutes to 1 hour per week (about 3 hours total during the testing phase)
1. [NAME - github]

Technical lead: We should involve one of the SIG's technical leads as liaison and to either contribute to the report to the SIG, or to review it. The person should also be available to answer questions during the testing phase

Needed: One technical lead
Time commitment: 3 hours minimum over the course of the testing phase
1. [NAME - github]

Localization team: To make sure we are testing the workflows completely, we'd like to make sure we have testers and reviewers from the same language. We ask that volunteers for these roles sign up from the same localization team, and fill the roles for their specific language. There should be TLMP testers and localization reviewers for each language that chooses to participate.

TLMP testers: People who'll try using the localization management platform to localize documentation.
- Needed: at least two people, but ideally more.
- Time Commitment: Two hours each minimum - over 30 days. Testers may want to spend more time testing, but we are asking that testers can spend at least 2 hours localizing within the tools.
Localization reviewers: Reviewers able to review in the same language as the testers.
- Needed: at least two reviewers from each localization team. We'll want to find out what the experience is like for reviewers, and we'd like to see more than one change get all the way to publication. *Time commitment: Minimum time commitment is about 1 hour over the testing phase.

Note: Ideally, testers and reviewers within a localization team are different people, which models how the localization workflow work now.

[Language] Team:

TLMP testers:

[NAME - github]
[NAME - github]

Localization reviewers:

[NAME - github]
[NAME - github]

Non goals

Directly adopt a translation management platform without trialling it
Force all localization teams to use or try a TLMP
Address all identified issues during the prototype phase

/area localization

k8s-ci-robot commented 3 months ago

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

SIG Docs takes a lead on issue triage for this website, but any Kubernetes member can accept issues by applying the triage/accepted label.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes/test-infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository.

a-mccarthy commented 3 months ago

@sftim and @seokho-son

sftim commented 3 months ago

I can cover the technical lead participation.

stormqueen1990 commented 3 months ago

@edsoncelio and I, from the Brazilian Portuguese localization team, are interested in volunteering for this. We do have one outstanding question: is it mandatory that all the involved people in the localization be at least a reviewer?

jihoon-seo commented 3 months ago

I want to volunteer for Korean TLMP tester and Localization reviewer. After other Korean volunteers choose their roles, I will choose the remaining seat between them. And I (or someone else) might ask more person to involve, at K8s Slack Korean L10n channel.

holgers66 commented 3 months ago

I would like to volunteer as a TLMP tester and localization reviewer for German (and could help with Brazilian Portuguese also if needed).

Andygol commented 3 months ago

I am ready to participate as part of the Ukrainian localization team 🇺🇦.

I have already given examples of using Crowdin and Transifex in https://github.com/kubernetes/website/discussions/45209, if you put them in a pile, we get the following

Criteria	Crowdin	Transifex
Creating a project	You must submit a request to use the free plan for an open source project	A link to a free license in the project settings is sufficient to create a project with a free plan
Tree structure of directories and files	by default	flat list of all files, directories are not shown
Content rendering	Supported	Not supported
Break the content into blocks for translation	Sentences (even for those that occupy several lines in the source)	Only separate strings
Webhooks	+	+
CLI	+	+
Addons	Marketplace	-
Content ownership	Belongs to the project owners	Belongs to the project owners
Already translated content in the source repository	Content translated in the source repo is synchronized with the project	Content translated in the source repo is synchronized with the project
*.md	+	+
*.toml	+	-

I hope this is helpful and will speed up the platform selection process.

jihoon-seo commented 3 months ago

Transferred my comment here to https://github.com/kubernetes/website/discussions/45209#discussioncomment-9007284 , in favor of Tim's comment.

Expand

According to the table @Andygol posted, IMO Crowdin seems more appropriate over Transifex for now, since - k/w repo has so many files in a big tree of directories - it supports realtime markdown rendering (← my recent experience of Crowdin usage confirms this) - it lets contributors translate sentence-by-sentence (it means that contributors can get benefits of MT and TM in a unit of sentence) - it has marketplace (where we might find useful addons for this project) - ... And FYI, the Kubesphere project is using both Prow and Crowdin, and there exist PRs that the Prow bot created to reflect Crowdin updates to the GitHub repo: see https://github.com/kubesphere/console/pull/4167 .

sftim commented 3 months ago

The best place to suggest or discuss which tool we might use is: https://github.com/kubernetes/website/discussions/45209

a-mccarthy commented 3 months ago

is it mandatory that all the involved people in the localization be at least a reviewer?

@stormqueen1990 no, its not required ALL the members of a localization participate, but it would certainly be helpful to get to opinion of multiple people within a team. We are asking that there are at least 2 reviewers from one team and at least one contributor who's not a reviewer. So i think that works out to needing 3 or 4 people from one team who are able to contribute to the testing as either a reviewer or a contributor.

rolfedh commented 3 months ago

I'd like to volunteer for the role of TLMP administrator. To improve response times, we should prefer administrators in differing time zones.

rolfedh commented 3 months ago

Use cases/workflows tested

Tooling implementation requirements

Long term support requirements

Team,

I'm looking to enhance our project planning and info gathering on key areas like use cases, tooling requirements, and long-term support. My plan is to set up Crowdin and Transifex accounts for better preparation and insight.

Unless there are objections, I’ll get started on this soon. Thoughts?

sftim commented 3 months ago

My plan is to set up Crowdin and Transifex accounts for better preparation and insight.

Unless there are objections, I’ll get started on this soon. Thoughts?

We should try to set up a Google Group to represent Kubernetes as owner of the SaaS tenancies there. Also, let's not actually start until we've confirmed we're kicking off the work and have resources in place.

sftim commented 3 months ago

/lifecycle active

rolfedh commented 3 months ago

We should try to set up a Google Group to represent Kubernetes as owner of the SaaS tenancies there.

Should I (or one of us) simply create the group, or would it be better to have someone with an "official" kubernetes.io-related email address do that?

rolfedh commented 3 months ago

Also, let's not actually start until we've confirmed we're kicking off the work and have resources in place.

I'll hold off on creating the account that we use for this project. What's the current timeline, or what next steps do we need to complete before kicking off the project?

seifrajhi commented 3 months ago

I want to like to volunteer as a TLMP tester and localization reviewer for Arabic (and I can also help with French also if needed).

zilmarr commented 2 months ago

I'd like to volunteer as a TLMP tester for pt-br.

stormqueen1990 commented 2 months ago

is it mandatory that all the involved people in the localization be at least a reviewer?

@stormqueen1990 no, its not required ALL the members of a localization participate, but it would certainly be helpful to get to opinion of multiple people within a team. We are asking that there are at least 2 reviewers from one team and at least one contributor who's not a reviewer. So i think that works out to needing 3 or 4 people from one team who are able to contribute to the testing as either a reviewer or a contributor.

Amazing! I think Brazilian Portuguese might be at (or close to) quorum then 🙂

a-mccarthy commented 2 months ago

Thank you all for your interest! I was planning to volunteer as comms lead as well.

Ideally we'd have 2 languages with a full set of testers (3 or 4 people). So far we have the following volunteers:

pt-br: @stormqueen1990, @zilmarr, @holgers66, @edsoncelio
ar: @seifrajhi ko: @jihoon-seo uk: @Andygol

Other volunteers: TMPL admins: @rolfedh (needs 1 volunteer) Tech lead: @sftim comms lead: @a-mccarthy

If you would like to participate, please respond by Monday, April 22nd with your interest. If we are able to fill the volunteer positions, then we can start planning for a testing kick off date and the timelines within the testing window (about 1 month from the kickoff date).

stormqueen1990 commented 2 months ago

Hi @a-mccarthy, could you please also add @edsoncelio to the group of interested people in pt-br? 🙏🏻 I mentioned in my original comment but I guess it got lost 😅

a-mccarthy commented 2 months ago

@stormqueen1990, added! apologies @edsoncelio 🙏

dies commented 2 months ago

Hello everyone,

Serhiy from Crowdin

I was super happy to find this discussion! I just wanted to say that we're more than happy to issue an unlimited open source license for this project and support you as much as we can. I would need your Crowdin login or an organization name to issue a license.

I also wanted to suggest a Slack channel for quick communication with Crowdin, especially during the setup period. Please let me know if this would be helpful.

a-mccarthy commented 2 months ago

Hi @dies 👋 thank you for reaching out. Great to hear about the open source license, once we have staffed the roles and decided to move forward we can chat more about setting that up.

I also wanted to suggest a Slack channel for quick communication with Crowdin, especially during the setup period. Please let me know if this would be helpful.

Do you mean a slack channel on a Crowdin slack? or some place else?

dies commented 2 months ago

Yes, a channel in our Slack where we can have our customer care team and engineers if needed and all the people involved from your side (project/community managers, engineers that might have technical questions)

jeefy commented 2 months ago

Hello! Friendly neighborhood CNCF rep here. <3

POC work is fine, but before we (CNCF) need to review the Terms of Service for CrowdIn before too much happens (I'll kick this off, don't block on this)
When you say unlimited open source license, is there any time box or additional info beyond what's on the OSS License Request? -- Relatedly, should we fill this out or were we hand-waving this for the POC work?
If this really takes off, would love to talk about a partnership for the rest of the CNCF projects :heart_eyes:

Thanks! Loop me into the Slack channel as well in case any quick questions arise. :D

dies commented 2 months ago

We would welcome every single CNCF project with open arms!

is there any time box or additional info beyond what's on the

No, no restrictions on open source. We only need your Crowdin.com login to create a license on our end.

If this really takes off, would love to talk about a partnership for the rest of the CNCF projects 😍

I started a Slack channel and sent an invitation (probably to your personal email address 😬).

I want to recommend a quick call with our architects before the POC to make sure the experiment goes smoothly.

jeefy commented 2 months ago

@natalisucks @sftim Does it make sense to direct folks, initially, to #sig-docs or perhaps #sig-docs-tools in the Kubernetes slack? Ignoring my pie-in-the-sky thoughts for other projects, this started as a Kubernetes initiative so I want to scope it that way and direct @dies and co to the right place.

natalisucks commented 2 months ago

@jeefy Thanks for thinking about this, the best channel for this initiative, as agreed by @a-mccarthy and other leads of this work, will be #sig-docs-localizations. Given we'll have several localization teams involved in this test, we want to keep the radius of this work wide enough for them, but concentrated outside of larger SIG Docs channels. Thanks!

dies commented 2 months ago

@natalisucks @jeefy I've joined #sig-docs-localizations 🤞 fingers crossed I can be of help

OleksandrTsyhankov commented 2 months ago

I am ready to participate as part of the Ukrainian localization team 🇺🇦.

kirkonru commented 2 months ago

Hi! I'd like to volunteer as a TLMP tester/localization reviewer for Russian.

tym83 commented 2 months ago

Hi! I'd like to volunteer as a TLMP tester/localization reviewer for Russian.

ArvindParekh commented 2 months ago

Hi folks! I'd like to volunteer as a TLMP Tester/Localization Reviewer for Hindi.

rolfedh commented 2 months ago

Hi @a-mccarthy, I hope you're doing well. I wanted to check in on the current status of resourcing for the TLMP testing project. Could you provide an update on when we might expect the official go-ahead? Your guidance will be greatly appreciated as we plan our contributions. Thanks!

sftim commented 2 months ago

I've stepped back as a technical lead for the SIG; I'm willing anyway to help informally with this work.

andriisoldatenko commented 2 months ago

I am ready to participate as part of the Ukrainian localization team 🇺🇦.

Andygol commented 1 month ago

@a-mccarthy 🛎️ are there any follow-ups?

natalisucks commented 1 month ago

Hi everyone – @a-mccarthy will need a little more time to get this initiative up and running due to some work commitments happening for her. Thanks for your patience – she will likely get things going in the next couple of weeks!

Andygol commented 1 month ago

Adding @salaxander and @katcosgrove to the loop as @sftim has stepped back from the Tech Lead role, I hope they will help launch this project 🚀

@natalisucks Please keep us posted on what's going on and what the plans are.

a-mccarthy commented 1 month ago

I've updated the volunteer requirements to include "Volunteers should also be Kubernetes Github Org members." This to make sure that volunteers have any necessary repo permissions that come up during testing and a baseline familiarity with our policies. Please reach out if you have any questions :)

Andygol commented 1 month ago

Are there any updates on the issue? 🛎️

Does the Legal provide their pros and cons? 👨‍⚖️

What has been done by SIG Docs to provide technical support for this initiative? 👨‍🔧

sftim commented 1 month ago

Are there any updates on the issue? 🛎️

The list of updates is public - see above

Does the Legal provide their pros and cons? 👨‍⚖️

I don't understand the question; CNCF legal wouldn't have an opinion on running this test.

What has been done by SIG Docs to provide technical support for this initiative? 👨‍🔧

SIG Docs put out a call for volunteers, and there's been some response.

Andygol commented 1 month ago

Are there any updates on the issue? 🛎️

The list of updates is public - see above

Nothing significant happened here for a month since https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/45756#issuecomment-2104246246

Does the Legal provide their pros and cons? 👨‍⚖️

I don't understand the question; CNCF legal wouldn't have an opinion on running this test.

RE ☝️ https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/45756#issuecomment-2047724899

sftim commented 1 month ago

Nothing significant happened here for a month since https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/45756#issuecomment-2104246246

I agree.

sftim commented 1 month ago

official go-ahead?

I don't think we're waiting on official go-ahead; if we have capacity to, let's clarify what's blocking us starting a proof of concept.

natalisucks commented 1 month ago

I don't think we're waiting on official go-ahead; if we have capacity to, let's clarify what's blocking us starting a proof of concept.

we can absolutely start a PoC for Crowdin via this initiative 👍

i would say that the additional clarification of all folks involved in testing needing to be Kubernetes organization members means we'll need to clarify who will be testing and who will need to work on that membership request to be involved

rolfedh commented 4 weeks ago

we can absolutely start a PoC for Crowdin via this initiative 👍

Okay, great! I'll begin setting up users on Crowdin. I'll call out for additional people to fill roles that remain open, if needed. (I was also under the impression we were waiting to receive some sort of official go-ahead. Let's save that for a retro, if any, and not dwell on that here.)

sftim commented 4 weeks ago

@rolfedh you should still sort out admins for the PoC tenancy and liaise with the current tech leads about how that'll be managed. I don't think "add users" is the step one that I'd pick.

Andygol commented 4 weeks ago

@rolfedh we have here the creator of CrowdIn ☝️ https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/45756#issuecomment-2047454858 💡

kubernetes / website