I don’t quite understand — what is being removed and where from it is removed?

Is the idea to have l10n FAS group to reflect the users in Zanata? Isn't that group also used for wiki translators that may not translate packages and thus never be in Zanata?

@piotrdrag:

• user in cvsl10, but not in zanata will be removed from FAS group. You'll find the list by using the column: "Is user in Zanata ?" from "FAS" sheet.
• user in Zanata but not in cvsl10n will be added. You'll find the list by using the column: "Is user in FAS ?" from "Zanata" sheet.

@lonemadmax:

• yes, the goal is to have the same list in FAS and Zanata, so we can grant translator a team badge, and make sure that all Zanata users are indeed in FAS so they can be part of the fedora Community (editing wiki, vote, etc.)
• a medium term goal would be not to ask anymore to join this FAS group, by automating the sponsoring. The API should come with our Zanata get updated. See #38

I don't think it is a most common use case to translate wiki but not our websites. But I may send a warning to the mailing list if you think it would be useful.

user in cvsl10, but not in zanata will be removed from FAS group. You'll find the list by using the column: "Is user in Zanata ?" from "FAS" sheet.
user in Zanata but not in cvsl10n will be added. You'll find the list by using the column: "Is user in FAS ?" from "Zanata" sheet.

OK, so please don’t touch “raven” and “piotrdrag” accounts in either system. I’m still in the process of transition from the former to the latter (which is held up on Alex).

user in cvsl10, but not in zanata will be removed from FAS group. You'll find the list by using the column: "Is user in Zanata ?" from "FAS" sheet.

Users in cvsl10n group but not in zanata should be kept in the FAS group, cause most of them had already registered in the FAS and signed the CLA, lots of this kind of users are very earlier Fedora l10n contributors. However the Zanata is relatively new and late, some of the contributors didn't like it at all during last translation platform migration, or they were not active during the session, as a result, their name are not in Zanata now.
A better way for this is to send a automatically message to them and ask them if they would like to join Zanata. If they will, it's OK, if they don't want, it's OK too. Translation is not on Zanata only.
So IMO, removing them from FAS group is definitely a bad idea.

user in Zanata but not in cvsl10n will be added. You'll find the list by using the column: "Is user in FAS ?" from "Zanata" sheet.

The later L10n join in procedure doesn't require an user to have an user page on Fedora wiki, from then on the contributors who request to join in a l10n team, will join Zanata only without have to be a cvsl10n group user, unless they requested it too.
For this kind of users, I think they can be added to the new l10n group directly.
In addition, some users are Zanata users only, they just registered in fedora.zanata, but they didn't request to be a language translator in their local language team's mailing list. The coordinator may not know them at all, add these kind of users to the group should be postponed.

Not sure why we have to post 700 email addresses here publicly. Any chance that we delete the email column?

Not sure why we have to post 700 email addresses here publicly. Any chance that we delete the email column?

+1

Well, this is a mistake, sorry about that, I deleted the column from "Zanata" sheet, but forgot the "FAS" sheet...
Please note the FAS email is reused in many places over the fedora project (for example, each po files provided by Zanata will include your email). But indeed, we should still prevent public listing ;)

Users in cvsl10n group but not in zanata should be kept in the FAS group, cause most of them had already registered in the FAS and signed the CLA, lots of this kind of users are very earlier Fedora l10n contributors. However the Zanata is relatively new and late, some of the contributors didn't like it at all during last translation platform migration, or they were not active during the session, as a result, their name are not in Zanata now.
A better way for this is to send a automatically message to them and ask them if they would like to join Zanata. If they will, it's OK, if they don't want, it's OK too. Translation is not on Zanata only.
So IMO, removing them from FAS group is definitely a bad idea.

Well, the badge is to reward translators, I find it difficult to consider someone part of the translation effort without connecting in Zanata in the last two years.
If a user feel like it, a simple request would resolve the issue. I do not feel comfortable about sending so many emails to people to increase numbers or to promote Zanata while we are doing a technical clean-up.

The only thing I fear is to have old time contributors loosing CLA+1, and indirectly "taking them off" the Fedora community. Maybe we can freeze the current FAS group, only add the users existing in Zanata to the new group, and grand them the translator badge?

Does it sounds good to you?

The later L10n join in procedure doesn't require an user to have an user page on Fedora wiki, from then on the contributors who request to join in a l10n team, will join Zanata only without have to be a cvsl10n group user, unless they requested it too.
For this kind of users, I think they can be added to the new l10n group directly.

The procedure does includes the FAS group, but it indeed isn't much applied, that's why I'm trying to move towards automation.
Bringing user to FAS group is to make sure the contributor is fully part of the Fedora community and can have access to our tools. This includes the wiki. I agree we do not require an user to have an user page on Fedora wiki.

In addition, some users are Zanata users only, they just registered in fedora.zanata, but they didn't request to be a language translator in their local language team's mailing list. The coordinator may not know them at all, add this kind of users to the group should be postponed.

The extracted users list provided are all part of language team which already approved by language coordinator. But I agree on not to include users which are not part of a language team.

Translation is not on Zanata only. So IMO, removing them from FAS group is definitely a bad idea.

Agreed. We need to find a way to track those translations that are done outside of Zanata.

The only thing I fear is to have old time contributors loosing CLA+1, and indirectly "taking them off" the Fedora community. Maybe we can freeze the current FAS group, only add the users existing in Zanata to the new group, and grant them the translator badge?

+1 from me.

If a user feel like it, a simple request would resolve the issue. I do not feel comfortable about sending so many emails to people to increase numbers or to promote Zanata while we are doing a technical clean-up.

What I mean is to find a way to automatically send a batch of emails, just for notification. I don't want to make it a manually work. :)

The only thing I fear is to have old time contributors loosing CLA+1, and indirectly "taking them off" the Fedora community. Maybe we can freeze the current FAS group, only add the users existing in Zanata to the new group, and grand them the translator badge?
Does it sounds good to you?

In this case, we'd better make a notification email(as I mentioned above) first. If the group is frozen directly, they would lose wiki editing privileges, although I don't how many of them are still active. Would it be good if a transition period is set, with two groups coexist with each other for some time.

No, freeze means no one can be added to the group anymore=2E They will not =
loose cla+1=2E
--=20
Jean-Baptiste Holcroft

No, freeze means no one can be added to the group anymore=2E They will not =
loose cla+1=2E
--=20
+1

Good, let's do it then=2E

@Alex, can you send me the same extract you sent me about zanata users per=
language team with emails please?
--=20
Jean-Baptiste Holcroft

Alex told me the next file will come next week or so. I decided to go with the "old file", I'll try to do one update per month so we stay sync with Zanata.

Request has been sent to Infrastructure team.
Once done, I'll update the wiki to replace cvsl10n to l10n, and write an #INFO in the next meeting.

fixed