Comment 1 by jteh on 2010-12-28 00:28
I don't see any way to resolve this. The contributors file is just that: a list of contributors. Often, there are multiple contributors for a particular translation and it is possible there is no single point of contact. If you aren't sure, email nvda-dev or file a ticket.
Changes:
Milestone changed from None to None
Added labels: wontfix
State: closed

Attachment contrib.patch added by orcauser on 2011-03-02 01:13
Description:

Comment 2 by orcauser on 2011-03-02 01:16
Attached is a patch that:

• converts the contributors file to a t2t file.
• seperates out code/design from translation contributions.
• Translation section is split depending on language.
• This should make it easier for peter, when an updated localization is received, then the entry for that persons contribution is updated.

This should mean that the long term contributors can easely be spotted.
I haven't done all the date digging for the languages that have more than one contributor, but hopefully those who are familiar with the language in question can be honest and update as needed.
To see an example of a team where people come and go, see the arabic section.

part of supporting NVDA is the translation effort, so hopefully this should ease the process.

Thanks.
Changes:
Removed labels: wontfix
State: reopened

Comment 3 by jteh on 2011-03-02 01:41
To be honest, I've been wondering for a while whether we should just have an alphabetical list of contributors without specifying what they contributed. I feel the Arabic section of the current contributors file is needlessly complicated, yet I understand that the team often changes which creates this complexity. In principle, it doesn't matter who contributed to what version; it just matters that they contributed something. Just listing the names of contributors alone avoids all of these headaches and is what many open source projects do (Mozilla and Rockbox to name two larger projects).

The only problem with this is that it's more difficult for people to contact specific translators. However, I think this probably needs to be maintained separately anyway, perhaps in a wiki article on the web site. This way, we can ensure it is always up to date, regardless of the version of NVDA someone examines.

Comment 4 by orcauser on 2011-03-02 08:04
I know what you mean, but by relegating the translators elsewhere people will get the feeling that a good localization isn't worth aiming for, or not valued so much.

As has been mensioned by other people, it should also be easy to see who have been contributed recently, so that people can communicate with them and improve the localization further.

The end goal is to get the highest quality product in terms of functionality and language support across as many languages as possible. So if this helps localizers work together then I would say that the current contributors file need to improve.

Another way of doing this, would be to have an updated translations section for each release, as part of the changes, which shows which language has been updated and who by. (This is what we do for orca).

Comment 5 by jteh on 2011-03-02 23:32
I think you might be misunderstanding me. Translators wouldn't be relegated elsewhere. Rather, they would receive the same recognition as developers. The contributors file would just include the names of both translators and developers with no additional information. We would then have a page on the web site entitled "Current Translators" which provides contact details for current translators only. For the Arabic team, this would just be arabictranslationteam@googlegroups.com, not the individual contributors. This allows people to contact the appropriate translators to report a problem.

The issue I have with the current Arabic section of the contributors file is that it includes unnecessary detail. All that matters is who contributed to the translation, not what versions they contributed to. In addition, arabictranslationteam@googlegroups.com isn't really a contributor; it's a contact point for the translation. This would be better served by the above solution.

Comment 6 by Bernd on 2011-11-11 22:35
What about note actual Contributors and translators with email address and list the other names in a sentence like: We also say thanks to the following people who contributed to this project before: 1st person, 2nd person, and so on.

In this case we would have the actual german translators David Pardun and me in the contributors list with emailaddress and for example René Linke in the comma separated list.

Comment 7 by orcauser on 2011-11-12 10:48
I think the compromize that will require minimum amount of work in the long term is this:

1. main developers and translation managers at the top
2. names of code contributors in alphabetic order
3. arrange languages in alphabetic order
4. names are sorted in alphabetic order inside the language
5. when any translation work is committed, authorship information is used to state the name of the contributer.

That way if the last contact for a particular language is required, then it is a simple matter of bzr log.

Jamie, if this sounds reasonable then I'll go ahead and do this.

Thanks.
Mesar

Comment 8 by jteh on 2011-11-12 12:01
I still think an alphabetical list of contributors with no other information is going to be easiest. Even the idea in comment:7 will result in duplicate entries for some contributors. I can't think of any other projects that describe what contributors have done in their authors/contributors files. Mozilla, Rockbox, BRLTTY and Orca just list names and sometimes email addresses. This is why I suggest that we separately maintain a wiki page with email addresses for current locale maintainers.

Comment 9 by jteh on 2012-02-24 11:20
Done in eb1be29 and e6519ad. We now only include contributor names.
Changes:
Milestone changed from None to 2012.1
State: closed

Comment 10 by blindbhavya on 2014-08-03 10:54
Hi.
I feel that the following sections should be there
Developers
Translaters
The entries in the translation section should be in the given format:
Translater's Full Name (language)
All entries under all sections should have the contact e-mail address of the contributer if any is known.

Comment 13 by nvdakor on 2014-08-03 11:31
Hi,
It becomes harder to differentiate who is who now, as some translators (including myself) are now working on add-ons or assisting with testing or developing NVDA core.
Thanks.

Comment 14 by blindbhavya on 2014-08-03 13:51
Hi.
Okay so four headings
NVDA Development
NVDA Add-ons Development
NVDA Translation
Other
I don't think it is a great issue if there are duplicate entries under each category.
P.S. If there is any other category I have missed, it is probably to my ignorance. I was just suggesting a format.

Comment 15 by jteh on 2014-08-03 22:49
This decision has already been made and there are no plans to change it any time soon.

Comment 16 by driemer.riemer@... on 2014-08-04 00:50
I would not want emails to be part of the contributors, as this is bad for peoples anonymity. I feel that having peoples email address made public in this way is more than likely not useful, as the project's bug tracker or other communications are more reliable. Plus, no one needs to contact individual contributors.

Comment 17 by blindbhavya on 2014-08-04 12:22
Hi.
It would have been very helpful in knowing about the contribution done by each contributer by categorization.
Please could you reconsider the following request:
The Contributers.txt file should have three headings (headings considering that you accept my suggestion about conversion of all documentation and other files into HTML format).
Core Developers
Add-on Developers
Translators
Miscellaneous
Note: If there is any category I missed, please comment.
If contributers have privacy issues and if you do not think it is useful, then lets drop the idea of providing contact information of the contributers.
I request all readers of this ticket to drop in their comments/views on this so Mr. James Teh can make his final decision.

Comment 18 by jteh on 2014-08-04 21:46
If it's so helpful, explain why no other major project does this. All of them just provide a list.

Add-on development doesn't count as a contribution to NVDA itself, so they wouldn't be listed for this.

As I've already explained, some work just doesn't fit well into categories. Also, what about documentation writers? What about those who just submit a small, tiny development fix? A tiny ne line change would get them listed as Developers, but that would be pretty confusing to someone like you who apparently wants to know exactly what each person did.

This is not going to be reconsidered unless a major community contributor makes a very strong case. Given that everyone has already accepted this decision and moved on, this is incredibly unlikely.