My general suggestion is it could be a dumb TM, but if any sort of AI algorithms involved they should be open source, the only one I know from the list you provided is OpenNMT. On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:15 Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org&gt; wrote:

Le 27/08/2019 à 15:04, Yaron Shahrabani a écrit : I take your comment as an occasion to make a little explanation. With Weblate, we will have a translation memory server. It's what we abbreviate as TM. In our hosting plan, I'll ask this translation memory server to be on a second server, on side of Weblate's main server. The user experience will be unchanged, results will still be displayed in Weblate. My idea is that: * TM server could have really different requirement in terms of resources, * we should be able to feed it with content coming from other open-source initiatives, * we may share it with one or more open-source initiatives, * we may move it to our infrastructure (I suspect we'll require some automation at some point) I understand that Benson would like to work on a machine translation server. It's what we abbreviate as MT. It makes it really easy to get confused, I did the mistake myself in the council ticket... This machine translation server will display suggestions in addition of the translation memory server, and teams will be able to use it if it is relevant for there language. This is a really welcome initiative, but this won't be part of the hosting plan we asked Council money for. This server will most probably use the community openshift infrastructure, which means Benson and other volunteer in our community will have to administrate it. Note that both translation memory and machine translation servers only get better with more source content, it's a virtuous circle that benefits everyone. Jean-Baptiste