SVN versus Wiki confusion
Posted by Keksmeister on 2009-06-12 15:18
Shizuka recently put up a warning not to make changes to UTF files in the SVN directly, because they will eventually be overridden by changes from the baka-tsuki wiki:
"Periodically, the Wiki translation will be used to update the UTF files on the SVN, overwriting whatever is here."
However, the baka-tsuki wiki itself states the exact opposite. Velocity7 writes:
"This wiki will remain as a history of all changes that happened to files, so people can look over and also navigate all the files/relevant changes, guidelines, etc. here."
Which means that according to Velocity7 the wiki should reflect changes to the SVN and not vice-versa.
Please make it clear where translation updates should go. Personally, I think the SVN is easier to use for collaboration than the wiki (being able to diff/branch/merge, easily revert changes etc.) but I'll leave that up to you. Just change these confusing contradictory statements, please.
"Periodically, the Wiki translation will be used to update the UTF files on the SVN, overwriting whatever is here."
However, the baka-tsuki wiki itself states the exact opposite. Velocity7 writes:
"This wiki will remain as a history of all changes that happened to files, so people can look over and also navigate all the files/relevant changes, guidelines, etc. here."
Which means that according to Velocity7 the wiki should reflect changes to the SVN and not vice-versa.
Please make it clear where translation updates should go. Personally, I think the SVN is easier to use for collaboration than the wiki (being able to diff/branch/merge, easily revert changes etc.) but I'll leave that up to you. Just change these confusing contradictory statements, please.
Home / Developer API / Tour / Get a Project - Solutions for Bug & Issue Tracking, Collaboration Tools, Subversion Hosting, Git Hosting
Clannad english localization is powered by Assembla.
2 Comments
By Shizuka on 2009-06-12 22:57
1. The Baka-Tsuki wiki (B-T) is easy to modify.
You don't need any type of account to modify it. The SVN requires an account to modify.
2. B-T is easy to view.
Simply access a webpage. No SVN stuff needed. The SVN requires downloading the file in question to view it (and you may disagree but some files are treated as binary by Assembla, so you can't view them.)
3. B-T has translation notes.
Translation notes are not included into the SVN when merged.
4. Contributions have continued on B-T
When the SVN was created, velocity7 did not lock or prevent modifications to the CLANNAD translation on B-T. Therefore, translation and editing work have continued on B-T regardless of Velocity7's intentions; B-T has the latest translation.
Working from the SVN is, in essence, creating a branch of the work on B-T--from a couple of months ago: as my SEEN0415 translation note edit did not make it in, it is at least older than mid-April.
In short, velocity7's statement that the Wiki will remain as an "archive" of sorts is not in practice what happened.
5. Automation
Updating the wiki with a script is difficult (captcha, multiple clicks); updating the SVN with a script is easy. Both are necessary if we synchronize two repositories with each other. In addition, this becomes a major pain if the two have conflicting edits.
Simpler is to synchronize one repository with another, which is why I suggest using B-T as the "master" UTF source and the SVN as a "checked out" copy. It also makes debugging easier...
6. Debugging
r44 is purely a bugfix update, due to errors in UTF compilation. Forgive me if I have the wrong idea, but every revision on the SVN ought to compile without errors. I don't want to do a SVN update and find myself building an incomplete script file (as I discovered in r44).
7. Review (A look at the big picture: why #1 and #2 are important)
Because we are trying to produce a localization of the highest quality, we view peer review as an asset. If translation updates are done on the SVN, only people who care enough about SVN can review your work. Because of the ease of viewing and editing the script files, B-T facilitates this kind of collaboration. The SVN, being a closed system and requiring membership to edit, is a pain to review, and does not facilitate peer review.
If you ask me what are the most important points, #1, #2, #4, and #7 are the most important.
By Keksmeister on 2009-06-17 01:15
I order to merge the two, however, a serious amount of work is necessary. I just compared the scripts on the wiki to current trunk and they already differ in many, many places. It would take hours to carefully merge the two without losing any progress that was made and this will become worse when more parallel editing is done.
One thing I noticed when comparing the wiki to SVN:
Why are most of the translators' comments (lines starting with "//") missing on the wiki? Did they get removed during some kind of cleanup process or something?