|Re: [babel-dev] Release review needed for Babel|
On 2009-06-22 23:59, Antoine Toulme wrote:Oh, you meant they can heck, um, hack, their way into the database server, not the app server. Right. Yes, that makes sense, as long as the web UI is 1.0. Otherwise, we're saying, "Here's a nice translation database. There's a UI, but you can't count on it yet. But what a lovely schema!"
I believe we should tell people that we were able to fulfill our
through our own php script, but that they can certainly hack
into the server, using Ruby, Java, or reusing our PHP script, to do
their own thing.
Does that mean the web service is pretty much there, Antoine?
No, it's not a web service. It's a PHP script you run locally. I think a
build to create the fragments would need to run locally, or at least
have ways to access to the DB in some way, to extract the fragments.
As long as the installation story is sorted out, marking 1.0 for the server sounds like a good idea. But that should probably include Genie or Sync-up, whatever it's called.
That reminds me: why haven't the Ganymede translations I did for en_AU been carried across to Galileo? Well, they are there, but they're all marked as suspect, which means they have to be reviewed one by one. If the resource key and the English text are the same, I don't think they should be marked suspect; it should be safe to copy them.
Senior Software Engineer
Engineering - Internationalisation
Back to the top