Loomio

Translating the wiki

G
goob Public Seen by 95

I've seen a request from a user to contribute Russian translations of the wiki in a comment on this post.

Are there thoughts to provide a mechanism for this?

It would be good to have wiki pages in users' native languages, but if translation is done manually there would be a lot of work each time a page in English is edited (and what if a page in another language is edited - does that feed back into English and other languages?). Version control would seem difficult.

There is a suggestion for having an FAQ directly within Diaspora on this discussions, but here I'm talking about the whole wiki text.

What are your thoughts?

JH

Jonne Haß Sat 3 Aug 2013

I don't particular like translated wikis, it often leads to a mess, the translations usually significantly lack behind, not only, for the reasons you mentioned. I like the approach of maintaining independent wikis, not trying to mirror any content, a lot more. We can also talk about handing out subdomains like ru.wiki.diasporafoundation.org.

G

goob Sat 3 Aug 2013

I would tend to agree with you, simply from a practical point of view. The wikis in other languages can be informed by the English one but not dictated by it, and improvements made in those languages can be fed back to the English and other ones as suggestions, no more.

JR

Jason Robinson Sat 3 Aug 2013

I tend to agree with Jonne here. Wiki's are by nature always lagging behind anyway - I really see no purpose to translate to something that is likely to lag behind even more. Help pages yes, wiki no.

Help pages should be translated as they are targeted to normal users. Our wiki is for technical stuff - technical people need to understand a lot of English anyway to get around, especially in the programming world. There is a reason why programming languages are not translated either.

But of course if someone really feels they want to translate parts of the wiki, can't stop them can we :)

G

goob Sun 4 Aug 2013

The wiki contains pretty much all information now, Jason - non-technical as well as technical, including basic user guides and 'getting started' tips. I agree it's the non-technical information which is more useful to translate.

W

Waithamai Mon 12 Aug 2013

i like the way translations are implemented in http://theportalwiki.com

they simply add a subpage to the english version, for diaspora wiki it would be eg. https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/FAQ_for_users as the original page, https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/FAQ_for_users/de for a german version, /es for the spanish version etc.

one can easily add a box on top of the original page that shows all available translations.

the advantage over a seperate wiki for each language is, all the content stays in the same place, just on different levels. the english version will always be the main article, so it's not much harm if the translations are not as frequently updated as the english version.

and, of course, it won't cause any problems to add a new language, because no extra wiki is needed to add it.

the correct language pages will be found with the search field through content, although they still use the original english title.

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 12 Aug 2013

I think there's no point in much further discussion. The first thing we need to decide is if we want translations in the wiki, if yes, how we implement them. I'll start a proposal for the first thing.

JH

Jonne Haß started a proposal Mon 12 Aug 2013

Allow non English content in the main wiki Closed Mon 19 Aug 2013

Outcome
by Jonne Haß Tue 25 Apr 2017

We want to allow non English content in the main wiki.

Without deciding on a particular form or rules, do we want non English content, not necessarily translated one, in the main wiki? If this proposal is rejected we're encouraging local communities to host their own wikis, giving out domains like de.wiki.diasporafoundation.org would not be rejected yet.

Results
Agree - 6
Abstain - 6
Disagree - 6
Block - 6
11 people have voted (40%)
JH

Jonne Haß
Disagree
Mon 12 Aug 2013

I think international content in wikis often leads to clutter, and makes it harder for administrators to patrol the wiki and for everyone to follow the changes. A bad example for this is wiki.archlinux.org.

W

Waithamai
Agree
Mon 12 Aug 2013

at least for info pages, i don't think we need other languages for the technical stuff

ST

Sean Tilley
Abstain
Mon 12 Aug 2013

Currently on the fence about this. It'd be nice to have translations on our wiki, but clutter isn't ideal, and having whole other wikis on subdomains in different languages could cause problems in that docs get out of sync.

F

Faldrian
Agree
Mon 12 Aug 2013

Let's maintain one wiki and separate the different languages with subpages or namespaces. :)

S

SuperTux88
Agree
Mon 12 Aug 2013

PP

Peter Palm
Agree
Mon 12 Aug 2013

G

goob
Disagree
Mon 12 Aug 2013

JR

Jason Robinson
Abstain
Tue 13 Aug 2013

Not sure. Would rather everyone just used English - it would lead to more accurate data as there would be more content maintainers :)

ST

Sean Tilley
Disagree
Thu 15 Aug 2013

I'd rather not have the extra clutter and documentation falling out of sync.

R

rhaglion
Agree
Thu 15 Aug 2013

Topics for standard user (not technical) should be well understood by everyone even for those who don't speak good english.

A

Airon90
Agree
Sat 17 Aug 2013

English-speakers are favoured in understanding Diaspora software and social network. Every language should be supported. To everyone who fear obsolete translations: there is an extension used in MediaWiki for translations.

T

twain
Disagree
Mon 19 Aug 2013

same as Jonne

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 12 Aug 2013

@seantilleycommunit no matter what method we use, if anything mirrors content at all it'll get out of sync. The solution is to not to try mirror content. Distinct wikis encourage that IMO.

G

goob Mon 12 Aug 2013

I think this is something where we have to go for the most practical solution. No matter how desirable it might be to have co-ordinated translations of the wiki, unless this can be done via a tool such as WebTranslateIt, I think it's going to be unworkable and lead to many out-of-date things appearing in different translations. I doubt whether this is possible on a MediaWiki wiki, so that means it would not be a good idea to try to keep the wiki translations co-ordinated.

I suspect therefore that it will be a better solution to have different subdomains of the wiki for different languages, which can then be developed somewhat independently.

It would probably be a good idea to have a group or mailing list for people involved in updating the wiki, so that if there is an important update, everyone can be alerted and update the wiki in their language as soon as possible.

G

goob Mon 12 Aug 2013

Oops, I meant to say that it would be great to have translations of the main project site as well. This can be done using WebTranslateIt.

If this were done, the first time a user visited the project site or wiki, they could be presented with a pop-up asking them to select their language from a list. This could then be stored as a cookie and used to serve up the right translation of the project site and direct them to the correct subdomain of the wiki. Hopefully.

A

Airon90 Sat 17 Aug 2013

JH

Jonne Haß Sat 17 Aug 2013

I still think that aiming for word by word or even page by page translation will just lead to even more outdated stuff than localized content will contain anyway.

G

goob Sat 17 Aug 2013

Some people seem to think that the proposal is 'Should there be wiki content in different languages? YES/NO.'

It's not this: there will be the aim to have good information available in as many languages as possible whatever the outcome.

The issue is: should all those translations be available on the same site (and if so, how will that be managed to make sure everything is kept up to date)?

Or, would it be better to allow diaspora* community members from different language communities to create and manage their own content, which may differ from the English text (and perhaps be more relevant to speakers of those languages)? These could be contained in subdomains of the English wiki, for example de.wiki.diasporafoundation.org for a German wiki.

It's not a question of whether we should have information available in different languages, it's a question of what is the best way to present, store and manage that information.

If we go for the translated content on one site, speakers of other languages will be restricted to some extent to keeping to the English text. If we allow separate wikis for different languages, users of those languages can create wikis that are best for speakers of those languages.

The wiki in English is only created by English-speaking community members, so it's no more 'official' or authoritative than what could be created in other languages. And if we allow speakers of other languages to create their own wikis, they might for example create a page which is missing in the English version and which could usefully be translated into English to help English-speakers.

There is already one extant independent non-English wiki - Le guide du parfait débutant, a guide for new users in French. And there are probably others - certainly there have been in the past. So whether or not we keep to strict translations from English all on the one site, there can and should be information available in as many languages as possible.

JH

Jonne Haß Sat 17 Aug 2013

This proposals intention is not to restrict non English content in the main wiki to translations of the English content, but whether about if we want to allow any form of non English content in it at all. There's absolutely nothing said about the scope and organization of non English content, intentionally. That's planned for follow up proposals.

G

goob Sat 17 Aug 2013

Sorry, I got in a bit of a muddle, thinking of the WebTranslateIt translations, which may not apply to the wiki.

But the main point I intended to make is that this proposal is not about whether or not there should be wiki content in different languages, but whether it should be collected all in the main wiki, or in different places (to be decided in a different proposal).

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 19 Aug 2013

Alright, you do want translations in the main wiki. Next step: How.

I see a couple of options:

  1. Allow arbitrary pages with non English titles and content, for example "Häufig_gestellte_Fragen"
  2. Suffix page names with the language name, for example "FAQ_for_users_(Deutsch)", only allow translations / interpretations of English content
  3. Nest pages under the English ones, for example "FAQ_for_users/de", only allow translations / interpretations of English content
  4. Give each language its own namespace, allow arbitrary content inside, for example "DE:Häufig_gestellte_Fragen"
  5. Give each language its own namespace, allow only translations / interpretations of English content, for example "DE:FAQ_for_users"

I'm voting for 4.

G

goob Mon 19 Aug 2013

I vote for either 4, or using a different subdomain for each language.

I realise this second option isn't strictly having the content in the main wiki, but I think a lot of people who voted on that misunderstood the proposal, and wouldn't actually object to this. I think it would be tidier and still give the result they were hoping for.

I'm happy iwth arbitrary content. There's nothing more authoritative about the English content - after all, some of it was written by me, and there are certainly plenty of speakers of all languages who could write better articles than I can.

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 19 Aug 2013

@goob do you know a mediawiki extension that allows that? I thought one has to setup and maintain distinct installations of it to do that and that's a burden I wouldn't want to put on @dennisschubert's shoulders.

G

goob Mon 19 Aug 2013

I don't, I'm afraid. I was guided by your earlier comments, which suggested that was a desirable solution. It seems neater to me than having pages on the same topics in different languages all mixed in together, but if it would add burden to Dennis or anyone, forget it.

If you can categorise wiki content in different languages in different namespaces on the main wiki, and that gives the same kind of notional separation, that sounds like a good solution.

In either case, I vote for option 4: separate space (however this is achieved); independent content.

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 19 Aug 2013

My earlier comments where about handing out the subdomains to local communities wishing to host their own wiki.

G

goob Thu 22 Aug 2013

A related question is, with a vote to have content in different languages hosted on the main wiki what do we do about wikis already hosted on separate sites? For example, there is http://wiki.forodiaspora.com.ar/ in Spanish.

I'm happy with such wikis to remain independent, but do those who voted for content in different languages feel that all Diaspora wiki content should be hosted in the one wiki?

W

Waithamai Thu 22 Aug 2013

i like option 3 and 4. both have their advantages. option 3 would mean there's only translated content in other languages, option 4 allows other pages too.
the problem i see with option 4 is, the translated pages are not directly connected with the original english page, which might cause some difficulties if somebody wants to find and read the original text.
i've already given reasons why i'd prefer option 3 earlier in this discussion ;) ( https://www.loomio.org/discussions/5662#comment-44256 )

JH

Jonne Haß Thu 22 Aug 2013

So how do we cut down the list? Vote whether we want to allow arbitrary content or just translated one?

G

goob Thu 22 Aug 2013

the problem i see with option 4 is, the translated pages are not directly connected with the original english page, which might cause some difficulties if somebody wants to find and read the original text.

I'm not sure quite why this would be a problem, Waithamai. If wikis are independent, each community will (hopefully) maintain and complete and up-to-date wiki in their language. As I've said before, there will be no reason to think the English text will be any more authoritative than the text in any other language. Therefore there should be no need for anyone to refer to English text, and if someone wants to read text in English, they can navigate to the English wiki and find an equivalent page (although likely not the same page) in English.

The exception to this, it seems to be agreed, will be the technical documentation. This would be maintained only in English. In this case, links to the relevant pages in the English wiki can be given in pages in other languages.

W

Waithamai Thu 22 Aug 2013

@goob problems occur when something is changed and the translated pages lag behind. some communities are more active than others.. so i'd like to keep the pages directly connected to each other. but it will work either way..

@jonnehass probably it would be more useful to vote whether to use an own namespace for each language or to include them in the main namespace.. but dunno

G

goob Thu 22 Aug 2013

Lag of the kind you describe would surely only be a problem if the translation were tied to the English text. If the wikis in different languages have independent content, there will be no lag.

Obviously if a particular community stops updating their pages, that will not be good, but that would be a problem whether the wiki content was tied to or independent of the English version. And the solution is to find ways to keep communities more active, which is a different matter. I don't think the possibility of a community becoming dormant in updating the wiki in their language is in itself an argument to have content tied to the English wiki.

JH

Jonne Haß started a proposal Thu 22 Aug 2013

Give each local community that wants it a namespace in the wiki for their non English content Closed Mon 26 Aug 2013

Outcome
by Jonne Haß Tue 25 Apr 2017

We don't want to give each language its own namespace, instead non English content will be allowed in the main namespace. Nothing is said about the structure that is allowed yet.

The namespaces would be the shortest upcased ISO 639 code that corresponds to the target language of the community. Examples would be:

and so on. Note that nothing is said about the allowed content of these pages yet. Also note that voting NO will mean that non English content will be allowed in the main namespace, but nothing would be said about the allowed form of the page titles.

Results
Agree - 3
Abstain - 3
Disagree - 3
Block - 3
12 people have voted (42%)
JH

Jonne Haß
Agree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

F

Faldrian
Disagree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

We don't need own namespaces for the languages, just look at the other comments that said we could do it with subpages.

W

Waithamai
Disagree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

i think we don't need anything more in other languages than translations of the english content. and for translations, another solution than namespaces is more useful, eg with subpages to the english page.

FS

Florian Staudacher
Agree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

namespaces ++

FS

Florian Staudacher
Abstain
Thu 22 Aug 2013

namespaces ++, but subpages are ok too

G

goob
Agree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

DB

Dee Baumdeesaster
Agree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

S

SuperTux88
Disagree
Thu 22 Aug 2013

use subpages

J

jonsger
Disagree
Fri 23 Aug 2013

MK

Moritz Kiefer
Disagree
Fri 23 Aug 2013

JR

Jason Robinson
Abstain
Fri 23 Aug 2013

Whatever the non-English community feels is best :P

T

theradialactive
Disagree
Sat 24 Aug 2013

A

Airon90
Disagree
Sat 24 Aug 2013

In this way you should create namespaces for every language.
I think that language translations should be kept in a subpage of the English one like this:
{{fullurl:Some_page/xx}}
where xx is the target language code as ISO 639.

A

Airon90 Sat 24 Aug 2013

IMHO, OSM is a very bad example.
WMF a positive one:
Let's see an example page: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Diff
It is based on template Languages
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Languages
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Languages/Lang
I think that it is the best solution for this kind of work

JH

Jonne Haß started a proposal Mon 26 Aug 2013

Allow only translations of English wiki articles Closed Sat 31 Aug 2013

Outcome
by Jonne Haß Tue 25 Apr 2017

The proposal was accepted.

Non English content will only permitted as subpages of English content. The subpage names should be the lowercase ISO 639 code, for example:

and so on. The content of these subpages should match the English version or at least be about the same topic.

Voting NO on this proposal will allow free form non English content without restrictions on content and page names.

Results
Agree - 11
Abstain - 11
Disagree - 11
Block - 11
11 people have voted (42%)
JH

Jonne Haß
Agree
Mon 26 Aug 2013

F

Faldrian
Agree
Mon 26 Aug 2013

A

Airon90
Agree
Mon 26 Aug 2013

G

goob
Agree
Mon 26 Aug 2013

(reluctantly)

W

Waithamai
Agree
Mon 26 Aug 2013

S

SuperTux88
Agree
Mon 26 Aug 2013

DB

Dee Baumdeesaster
Agree
Tue 27 Aug 2013

FS

Florian Staudacher
Agree
Tue 27 Aug 2013

most wikis I know do it this way, also, translations will be hard enough to keep current, so let's start with a manageable dimension - english first, then translate

DS

Dennis Schubert
Agree
Wed 28 Aug 2013

JR

Jason Robinson
Agree
Wed 28 Aug 2013

PP

Peter Palm
Agree
Thu 29 Aug 2013

G

goob Mon 26 Aug 2013

I'm not sure how to vote on this, because I would prefer each language community to be able to record information in their own way, but the vote for each language to have a separate namespace was defeated, and it would be far to chaotic to have completely unrelated pages in all sorts of languages floating around on the same wiki.

I don't really like idea of maintaining the supremacy of English in diaspora. In some cases, e.g. the main diaspora app, it makes sense, because it's developed in English, and text has to be the same in each language as it is used in very specific ways, so strict translations is sensible. However a wiki is purely text, with no strict reference to something else, so there is no reason to compose text in one language and translate directly into other languages.

I still feel it would be better to allow each language an area to create their own wiki. However, as the vote was not to allow each language their own area, the only real option is to force each language to translate directly from English. However, I think it will be a shame if this is what ends up happening, for the reasons above.

So this vote is kind of, I would really like to vote no, but given the results of the previous votes, my only option is to vote yes. Unless someone can suggest another way forward.

JH

Jonne Haß Sun 29 Sep 2013

So now people go ahead and create non English categories... like https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Category:Comunidad

Opinions?

JH

Jonne Haß Sun 29 Sep 2013

G

goob Sun 29 Sep 2013

To me it makes no sense to have pages in a language which are listed in categories in another language, or templates in another language - or that the page title is also in another language. It makes no sense to me to have (in this case) a page in Spanish with an English page title, or for pages in Spanish to be listed in categories in English or templates in English. An Hispanophone is not going to find a list of page titles, categories or templates in English very useful, unless they speak English well.

This is one of the reasons I was (and am) in favour of allowing different language communities to form wikis in their own languages in their own structure rather than restricting non-English content to direct translations of English articles. If we're saying 'no, you can't have categories or templates in your own languages', then it's not really fit for purpose for speakers of those languages - it leaves an hierarchy with English at the top, which I don't like, and also requires everyone to be able to speak some English to fully use the wiki, which kind of negates the purpose of having translations.

I still think we should allow different language communities to do whatever they want - having a different namespace for each language seemed like a good solution to me. Perhaps now problems are arising as a result of the decisions made previously, it would be worth discussing again the different options and taking some new votes.

FS

Florian Staudacher Mon 30 Sep 2013

we are a global community and as such we have to find a common denominator for languages.
We took a vote, and decided it would be English as a base language and from that we would create translations... A different proposal was already declined by a majority.

If we look at other wikis that have the same translation scheme, they seem not to translate "system content" like templates or categories (since that does not comply with the scheme of "Article/lang", also, it does get very "meta" in that area).

We have chosen a way to go, now we should stick with it... at least a little longer than just one month.

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 30 Sep 2013

JH

Jonne Haß started a proposal Sat 5 Oct 2013

Disallow translations of the installation guides Closed Tue 15 Oct 2013

Outcome
by Jonne Haß Tue 25 Apr 2017

The proposal was blocked.

Installing and maintaining Diaspora will at some point need you to understand English, allowing translations of the installation guides in the official wiki would just create the false impression that this isn't the case. Also a lot of effort went into making the installation guides easy to maintain and therefore always up-to-date, translations effectively harm this effort, bringing more out of date information to this essential part of the community and software.

Agreeing to this proposal will cause any existing translations to be removed from the wiki (there's no serious attempt as far as I can see).

Results
Agree - 6
Abstain - 6
Disagree - 6
Block - 6
8 people have voted (33%)
JR

Jason Robinson
Agree
Sat 5 Oct 2013

A

Airon90
Block
Sun 6 Oct 2013

Translating the wiki means, translating the guides too.
You can't translate a page and don't translate another one!

G

goob
Agree
Sun 6 Oct 2013

Agreed, but it might be worth having an 'installation' page in each language explaining that installation guides are only available in English, and explaining why (need to speak English to be able to install d*).

JH

Jonne Haß
Agree
Sun 6 Oct 2013

FS

Florian Staudacher
Agree
Sun 6 Oct 2013

T

twain
Agree
Mon 7 Oct 2013

ST

Sean Tilley
Agree
Tue 8 Oct 2013

DB

Dee Baumdeesaster
Block
Mon 14 Oct 2013

If users translate into their language support them instead of prohibit it. This is an international project and not everyone is comfortable with english.

JH

Jonne Haß Sun 6 Oct 2013

@michaelmoroni I do think you can. And in this case it would be harmful to translate them.

A

Airon90 Sun 6 Oct 2013

@jonnehass
I'm in favour of deleting template:Idiomas only because the word "Languages" is translatable in another efficient way.
I think that category names should be translated too because it makes clear the sense of that category.

About translation of installation guide: nope, harmfulness of obsolete translation is a problem even with all other pages. We should translate all page or don't translate at all. If you don't translate installation guide what would you translate? What if you want to install a Linux distro (i.e. Arch Linux) and you can find a wiki about it (ArchWiki) and you can find all content translatable but installation guide? Isn't it non-sense? Doesn't it encourage you to fulfill the missing translation?

It's linguistic democracy: everyone should be able to get a content in their own language.

We chose to translate the wiki so we translate ALL the wiki. My position is to block this votation because the proposal is non-sense.

JH

Jonne Haß Sun 6 Oct 2013

You're neglecting my other major point though: The impression that you can maintain a (diaspora) server without English knowledge is false. Our configuration file is commented in English. Our configuration examples for Nginx and Apache are commented in English. The configuration files for Redis, MySQL and PostgreSQL are commented in English. The configuration files for Postfix, Exim and possibly any other MTA you can think of are commented in English. All your log files are in English. There aren't translations for all manual pages. Even using the commandline requires English skills because all command names are based on it.

Then our project has a history of terrible installation guides, even if you know English well, people failed all the time on them, the new guides improved that situation but they still do. So you need to able to seek support. Best way to do that requires you to speak English.

I see no benefit to translating the guides, it only adds content that gets quickly outdated and misleading. Stuff like the main page or the user FAQ is a whole different story because in fact you can use Diaspora without speaking English, diasporafoundation.org soon will become available in many languages, with autodetection, Diaspora itself already is available in many languages with autodetection. You just won't be able to maintain a pod without speaking English, so no added value here.

A

Airon90 Mon 7 Oct 2013

Thank you @jonnehass. You confirm my block position.

Again, it's not about being able to understand English in order to maintain a pod but it is about getting contents in your own language. It's simpler to follow instruction in your own language instead of follow instruction in a foreign language.

It doesn't need to understand English language in order to install a pod if you have a guide in your own language.

I'd prefer not to translate the wiki at all instead of translating only part of it. Sincerely.

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 7 Oct 2013

It doesn’t need to understand English language in order to install a pod if you have a guide in your own language.

This statement is plainly wrong, as I've outlined earlier. You yet didn't refute the argument that a translated guide would only create the false impression of being able to install and maintain a pod without English knowledge. Therefore I conclude that you only have an opinion and no arguments on the topic, I don't think that justifies a block, please just vote no to express your opinion. A block should only be used if you have objective arguments against an idea.

G

goob Mon 7 Oct 2013

@michaelmoroni

In this way you should create namespaces for every language.

A proposal for that was made a while ago, but was voted down. See https://www.loomio.org/discussions/5662?proposal=4088

So we can't do that, unless another vote is taken. For the moment, we need to go with what was voted, which is for direct translations from English into different languages all in the main wiki.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 14 Oct 2014

@deebaumdeesaster @michaelmoroni would you still block the last proposal? It's been a year and the language switcher on the guides is just confusing crap.

JH

Jonne Haß started a proposal Wed 29 Oct 2014

Disallow translation of the installation guides Closed Mon 24 Nov 2014

Outcome
by Jonne Haß Tue 25 Apr 2017

Translations of the installation guides are no longer allowed.

What changed since the last proposal:

  • We allowed translation of the guides for over a year now, so far no serious or sane attempt has been made.
  • The more serious attempts caused havoc on the English guides and had to be partially reverted.
  • I haven't met a single podmin who can't understand enough English to follow the guides.

Additional arguments not mentioned in the last proposal:

  • You need to run a server to run Diaspora. When you run a server you should understand English, at least to be able to respond to eventual abuse notices.
  • If you run a server, in order to keep it secure, you should follow security issues, which are first published in English.
  • Still a lot of documentation external but related to Diaspora is only available in English.
  • We can't ship example configs in all languages, that would be even harder to maintain. Thus you'll need some English skills when it comes to configure your pod.
  • The logs are in English. Making these translatable would be insane.
  • We won't maintain a Changelog, that contains mandatory upgrade notices, in multiple languages.
  • We won't wait to release until we have release notes in every language we (might) have an installation guide in. Especially for security releases.

Points of the last proposal still stand:

Installing and maintaining Diaspora will at some point need you to understand English, allowing translations of the installation guides in the official wiki would just create the false impression that this isn’t the case. Also a lot of effort went into making the installation guides easy to maintain and therefore always up-to-date, translations effectively harm this effort, bringing more out of date information to this essential part of the community and software.

Agreeing to this proposal will cause any existing translations to be removed from the wiki

Results
Agree - 9
Abstain - 9
Disagree - 9
Block - 9
12 people have voted (46%)
JH

Jonne Haß
Agree
Wed 29 Oct 2014

F

Faldrian
Agree
Wed 29 Oct 2014

Will reduce confusion and workload. If there are non-official guides to help people with problems understanding english, it's okay. They can also ask in the IRC for help... it will work with pure english. :)

W

Waithamai
Agree
Wed 29 Oct 2014

JR

Jason Robinson
Agree
Wed 29 Oct 2014

Totally agree

G

goob
Agree
Wed 29 Oct 2014

Absolutely. Anyone installing software of this complexity will have to have a reasonable grasp of English in any case. And we cannot risk having outdated installation instructions in different languages.

S

SuperTux88
Agree
Wed 29 Oct 2014

FS

Florian Staudacher
Agree
Thu 30 Oct 2014

J

jonsger
Agree
Tue 4 Nov 2014

F

Flaburgan
Disagree
Fri 7 Nov 2014

Thinking about again, but my position is the same. The main blocker is "a sysadmin needs to know english". nginx, postgresql, ruby, every other documentation involved are available in other languages. Besides, people are going to do it anyway.

A

Airon90
Block
Sat 8 Nov 2014

Everyone should be able to install Diaspora, even people who don't understand English.

Language MUST NOT be a barrier to free software.

A

Airon90
Block
Sat 8 Nov 2014

Everyone should be able to install Diaspora. Even people who don't understand English must be able to run a own pod.
Language MUST NOT be a barrier to free software. Someone can be discriminated by this kind of proposal if it will be approved.

Y

y.semin
Agree
Wed 12 Nov 2014