Space for proofreaders / reviewers

[Aikatsui]

Description

If enabled, Display proofreaders (reviewers) for each languages on project #information area. e.g. https://hosted.weblate.org/projects/aurora-store/#information (it can be set to expand / collapse for save space or reduce page default length)

Benefits:

1. For translators - Easy to contact language experts, discuss issues, share knowledge etc
2. For administrators - Contributors will contact their locale manager / reviewer first for any localization related issues. Also, this helps to remove external language team / managers / reviewers pages https://translations.documentfoundation.org/ e.g. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Language_Teams

(credits: transifex)

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been added to the backlog. It is not scheduled on the Weblate roadmap, but it eventually might be implemented.

In case you need this feature soon, please consider helping or push it by funding the development.

[comradekingu]

@Aikatsui This isn't bad functionality, but you are putting a lot of assumptions into it. It makes it easier to know who people are, and to contact them by finding their names to copy. In my experience issues are nearly always dealt with in the respective string/s, as they should.

Sometimes I want to know how many people are watching a certain project or language, because it tells me how many eyeballs are seeing changes. This is a sign of popularity, and helps identify uncovered areas.

If typing "@reviewers" or "@projectadmins" works to contact people, it means no extra info is shared, and the legal info doesn't need to be changed(?).

Access to the "info" field for each language might be useful. I don't see why it should be restricted.

Reviewers in LO or ownCloud (or anywhere?) are not language experts, and IMO the functionally flawed idea that reviewers are different people sells translators on the idea that others will fix the issues they make.

[Aikatsui]

Reviewers in LO or ownCloud (or anywhere?) are not language experts, and IMO the functionally flawed idea that reviewers are different people sells translators on the idea that others will fix the issues they make.

UI example 🤔 (UI enhancement for an existing feature: roles) https://docs.weblate.org/no/latest/admin/access.html#list-of-groups

But according to some large projects guidelines, translators should collaborate with their main reviewer (or locale admin / manager, team leader) for any issues.

[comradekingu]

@Aikatsui Quality-wise there is no higher authority than the individual translator.

The groups are just part of the permission system. It doesn't mean the UI has to be divided into each, or even show them. I absolutely detest the Transifex way, because it tries offloading the question of whether one string is correct or not for each person seeing it into an arbitration of roles. Turns out language coordinators can't pick the correct people for languages they don't speak either. Admins sure like to pretend that they can. And they write guidelines nobody reads.

If you want to be the main anyone, you have to be there to ensure nobody makes any bad changes. None of the systems are currently any better than that, but Transifex is a lot worse because it pretends otherwise.

In defence of privacy, I just want to know the number of watchers. Where do I need to recruit people to watch the changes happen? Polish? French? etc. If I want to know how the reviews are going, I just look for blue coloured bars. (That is currently as meaningless as translation coverage, because there can be multiple reviewers.)

If disclosing who people are, showing the amount of contributors via their avatars on each respective page is a good way to go. That way translators can click on the ones they are unsure about and "review" their work first.