About the malicious translation incident

I wasn’t notified about moving from Github commits into Weblate.

Since I am the coordinator of Spanish Translation Team I wish I had more control over the translations that are sent to that platform in the same way I have control over the translations made in Launchpad.

We carefully select our members by the quality of their contributions and a voting process as described in the guidelines for creating a translation team.

So if you want to honor our efforts and avoid future incidents I ask you to be more communicative with your translation teams in general.

And please give me some review powers in Weblate.


Canonical sidestepping Ubuntu’s community is not a good look.

You were told that the measures would be tightened.

I don’t think it’s appropriate to say that Canonical is moving away from the community when less than a day has passed since the statement and your comment, for that matter.

Be careful with that because you’re walking a line. Never assume bad faith. From the Ubuntu Code of Conduct (which you’re bound by just by participating here):

Be Respectful:

Disagreement is no excuse for poor manners. We work together to resolve conflict, assume good intentions and do our best to act in an empathic fashion. We don’t allow frustration to turn into a personal attack. A community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one.

1 Like

His (her?) statement is written neither in poor manner nor in a fashion of a personal attack. Merely a person’s critcism that he/she felt to express. If it is right or wrong, that can be up to a debate. There is nothing wrong with the literal wording.

“Assume good intentions” part of a code is nothing else than an absurd attempt to silence any kind of criticism might meet Canonical once in a while and the inclusion of those 3 words is of poor taste. Very.

1 Like

It does not say “assume good intentions by canonical”

… it is just a plea to please do not assume conspiracy, bad intentions or planned negative actions by anyone when discussing…

This is obviously not to quieten criticism but to keep a healthy discussion culture alive…

Accusing canonical to intentionally “sidestep the community” simply because there was an oversight in permission handling in a new tool is definitely not “assuming good intentions”

A mistake happened, it won’t happen again, if communication about the new tool in use was not proper it needs to be improved, but please don’t blow things out of proportion here… there is no conspiracy to exclude community or anything


I’m trying to give constructive criticism. Mistakes happens and I’m sure you’ll make sure it won’t happen again. I just thinks the community wants to be part of the solution.

When the investigation is concluded and you figure out the way forward let us be part of that.
My team and I can take care of reviewing those translations.

And I agree there are no intentions of Canonical to exclude the Community.

I’am afraid you will just close translations completely and ask a couple of employees to work on them. And they already have too much work so the process will be slow.


As I recall, this topic was about the translation incident.

Let’s all please return to that topic. There seems much to discuss that may be productive.