=== ddaa [n=ddaa@nor75-18-82-241-238-155.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #launchpad-meeting === salgado [n=salgado@200-171-140-32.dsl.telesp.net.br] has joined #launchpad-meeting === flacoste [n=francis@modemcable207.210-200-24.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #launchpad-meeting [08:05] ok [08:05] hi salgado [08:05] hi flacoste [08:05] hello [08:05] hi [08:05] so, we have some specs [08:06] https://launchpad.canonical.com/LaunchpadI18n [08:06] https://launchpad.canonical.com/LocalizedSupportTracker [08:06] https://launchpad.canonical.com/LocalizedLoginWorkflow [08:06] https://launchpad.canonical.com/LocalizedSupportRequests [08:06] this is team work [08:06] :-) [08:07] excellnet [08:07] and the purpose of this meeting is to answer what question exactly? [08:08] which of these specs are going to be a 1.0 target [08:08] basically, is LocalizedLoginWorkflow still a 1.0 target? [08:08] or what part of LaunchpadI18n can be done for 1.0 [08:09] ah -- note the typo [08:09] https://launchpad.canonical.com/LocalizedLoginWorfklow [08:09] Worfklow [08:09] it is klingon :-) [08:10] heh === salgado fixes [08:12] ok [08:12] next question... resources [08:12] what resources do we have to do any work we agree to today? [08:12] iow [08:12] what do you guys have on your 1.0 specs lists? [08:13] I have person-creation-rationale, which I hope to finish by middle of next week [08:13] i have the support-tracker-workflow specification which is quite big and then support-trackwer-views and help pages for the support tracker [08:13] then I have direct-person-creation, which has a blocker issue and is not even speced yet [08:14] SteveA: do we have a date for 1.0? [08:17] yes and no [08:17] let's say, mid to end oct [08:17] i think i can finish my 1.0 assigned spec in ~3 weeks [08:18] ok, well... that doesn't leave much resources to do this. [08:18] indeed, not very much [08:18] so, we have a couple of themes [08:18] 1. recording what language support requests are in [08:19] 2. internationalizing launchpad, and localizing at least the login and support parts [08:21] part 1 i'd say is a definite 1.0 thing [08:21] i would like to point out that the way the spec about #1 is worded, it relies on users being able to state which languages they support [08:21] which language they support? [08:21] you mean, for supporters? [08:21] exactly [08:21] or for people filing support requests? [08:21] yeah, for support contacts, mainly [08:21] okay [08:22] so, if I'm support contact of Launchpad, I want to receive only support requests on the languages that I speak [08:22] I see [08:23] that sounds very reasonable [08:23] this is already possible, but not very "visible" [08:23] (I'm assuming we're going to reuse the existent PersonLanguages table) [08:24] well, I think first of all yes [08:24] we might find that ability to translate is different from ability to answer support requests, for example [08:24] so there are differing language levels [08:24] but that can come later [08:24] another use of the person's languages is to select which requests to display in listing [08:25] The spec stated: "All code related to searching support requests will have to be changed to only display requests written in one of the user's preferred languages." [08:26] admins should be able to see it all, somehow [08:26] otherwise, I can imagine support problems [08:26] flacoste, how hard will it be to do that? [08:26] I think everybody should be able to see them all [08:26] salgado: well, it is not hard to implement, just another criteria on the searchTickets() method [08:27] or, get everyone to see them all [08:27] but show the language with them [08:27] I dont' know [08:27] we'll have to see what works best [08:27] the biggest problem I can see is with tsearch2, as our stopwords and stemming algorithms are for english only, IIRC [08:27] so, to be totally honest, I don't see us making significant progress on internationalization before 1.0 [08:28] I'd rather say "internationalization and localization is a 1.1 goal" [08:28] so, allow support requests to be filed in particular languages, and searched for in particular languages etc. [08:28] but put the internationalization off until we do it properly across all launchpad [08:29] what do you guys think about that proposition? [08:30] salgado: yeah, you have a point about the tsearch2, for text search in non-english languages [08:30] sounds good to me, but the we'll have even bigger problems with searching for tickets in languages other than english than we already have for searches in english [08:30] the stopwords and stemming should do no *harm* for other languages [08:30] they should just help english [08:30] which is still our main language [08:31] (unlike orkut, where portugese is the main language ;-) ) [08:31] salgado: it would require some changes to the fti implementation to use the ticket's language for proper indexing (tsearch2 can support that) [08:31] but we can delay that for 1.1 [08:32] yeah, that sounds good [08:33] so, https://launchpad.canonical.com/LocalizedSupportRequests is targeted at 1.0 [08:33] but the others aren't [08:33] is that right? [08:33] i'm not sure about that [08:34] i'm not sure it will be really helpful to have a language attribute on the support requests without any other i18n support [08:34] it's not like we had lot of non-English support requests [08:35] there will be a lot of changes to the support tracker for 1.0, so it might be better not to add a half-baked feature to the lot [08:35] wouldn't look to good, imho [08:35] I don't see that it's half-baked [08:36] SteveA: sorry, that was too strong a word [08:36] I mean, if we add detection of an appropriate language from browser metadata, maybe it would be okay [08:36] so the appropriate langauge is detected by default [08:36] also, I'd like to note that we *can* do non-1.0 things after the 1.0 things are complete [08:37] so, we can say "full internationalization + localization of login is a goal right after 1.0" [08:37] and that doesn't mean the *release* of 1.0 [08:37] another problem I can see is that, if we give people the option to make a request in their native language, they'll prefer that, of course, but they may not get an answer because there's no support contact who speak that language [08:37] but the completion of 1.0 features [08:37] salgado: that's a bug in the spec, perhaps [08:37] "When there is no support contact that speaks the new request language, [08:37] the others get a small notification about the new request. The user [08:37] gets an informational message about the fact that no support contact [08:37] speaks his language. [08:37] " [08:38] ah, nice [08:38] ooops [08:38] of course, for 1.0, that message is in english [08:38] so, depending on how 1.0 targets go, maybe we can get (for example) salgado and stub to do i18n [08:38] SteveA: the user will have to know some English in order to be able to post a support request in a non-English language, so that is probably not a problem [08:39] once their 1.0 tasks are complete [08:40] that makes sense, my idea is more that the localized-support-request should have a low 1.0 priority [08:43] SteveA, salgado: are we done here? [08:44] ok [08:44] I think so [08:44] well, the 1.0 thing is more like [08:44] "here are the tasks by which people and management will be judged" [08:44] so I'm very happy to have these out of 1.0 [08:44] but as a high priority for after 1.0 [08:44] that's fine by me [08:45] that way, if we miss them, it's okay, but they get done as soon as possible after the stuff agreed for 1.0 [08:45] so, do give them a high priority in the spec tracker [08:45] but just leave the support tracker one as 1.0 [08:45] okay. will do === flacoste added some issues raised in the meeting to the Unresolved section of the spec [08:46] SteveA, salgado: thanks for the discussion [08:47] thanks flacoste, SteveA! [08:47] ok, thanks guys === flacoste [n=francis@modemcable207.210-200-24.mc.videotron.ca] has left #launchpad-meeting ["Bye"] === salgado [n=salgado@200-171-140-32.dsl.telesp.net.br] has left #launchpad-meeting ["Leaving"]