Is there a local consensus for that?

Could you explain why it would be interesting to have that, and which underlying problem it would solve?

Translating pages is useful to almost any project, so I understand the general rationale. For example, we already plan to deploy Content Transltaion to Wikivoyage some day, and Wikiversity is an option, too. However, this will add considerable maintenance burden that we currently cannot afford, so for the time-being we only focus on Wikipedia, and I don't know when will we start deploying to other projects.

@Aklapper the specific need that conducted to my request was that I would like to translate Lingua::Romana::Perligata to Esperanto (using the subpage translation tool, like on meta and so on).

Morever I have some research projects on the French Wikiversity that I would like to translate in Esperanto (cross wiki translation, like on wikipedia and so on). That would ease my work to maintain evolution of this projects, with two clearly distinct language versions.

Now beta.wikiversity, contains several languages in the same instance, and in discussion pages users are encouraged to talk in whatever language they feel confortable, so I guess it also may have some interest, although that's sound rather "in theory" as far as I can say.

@Arseny1992 there's nos dissensions at least. If that's the question, yes I asked for the locale community opinion. So if you take the "silence gives consent" approach, there clearly a 100% consensus between me, myself and I (believe me, having this three to agree is already a great achievement). :) Now if you have suggestion to bring more feed back, please provide me you advises.

@Amire80 Ok I understand the maintenance burden. On the other hand, as far as I could found, no one except me was crying out loud with the fact that the VisualEditor was broken on this instance (by the way now fixed, thank to who may be concerned). So if your concern is on having many users locked due to maintenance problem, I think it should be okay. Now if the load is more something like "it takes a nightmarish workload to install and update stable releases of this extensions", ok, ressources can certainly be better spent elsewhere. :)

In T148947#2757313, @Psychoslave wrote:

@Amire80 Ok I understand the maintenance burden. On the other hand, as far as I could found, no one except me was crying out loud with the fact that the VisualEditor was broken on this instance (by the way now fixed, thank to who may be concerned). So if your concern is on having many users locked due to maintenance problem, I think it should be okay. Now if the load is more something like "it takes a nightmarish workload to install and update stable releases of this extensions", ok, ressources can certainly be better spent elsewhere. :)

Yes, it's the latter. Installing and configuring Content Translation on the server is rather complicated because of its massively multilingual nature, the need to work with Parsoid, Apertium and other constantly changing services, etc. We are constantly improving it and making it easier to maintain, but it will take a bit of time till we get to non-Wikipedia projects. It's definitely on the map, however.

Ok, thank you @Amire80 for the feedback. I think I can wait, it's not like there wasn't many tasks I can do without any other extension installed. Well, I reallly would like to advance on some translation, but I guess I may transfer the content on some wikipedia user page, make my translation and transfer it back to beta.wikiversity.

Another request for Wikiversity.