linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH]Documentation: Chinese translation of Documentation/arm/kernel_user

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20121101142338.GA29971@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2012 15:23:38 +0100
From:	Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Tekkaman Ninja <tekkamanninja@...il.com>,
	Harry Wei <harryxiyou@...il.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]Documentation: Chinese translation of
 Documentation/arm/kernel_user_helpers.txt

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 05:34:15PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:06:19PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > 
> > What's the best way of making sure that changes in the source document
> > propagate to translated versions?
> > 
> > It might be enough to put a note in the source document to remind people
> > to check for the extistence of translated versions and CC the relevant
> > translation maintianers with any patches affecting the source document.
> 
> What I was suggesting was even more light-weight.  Just include at the
> very beginning or the very end of the the file the last time the
> translation was updated, and either the kernel version (i..e, v3.6) or
> the git commit ID (i.e., df981d03eeff) that was used for the source
> document.
> 
> That way, someone who reads the file will know how "fresh" the
> document is, and the reader can do a "git log -p
> Documentation/arm/kernel_user_helpers 1234567890abcd.." to see all of
> the changes made to the file since the last time the translation was
> updated.
> 
> People will inevitably remember to forget to notify the translation
> maintainers, and as the number of translations go up, the more
> workload we put on the everyone else.  If we simply mark the
> translation, then the translators can poll to refresh the document at
> their leisure, or perhaps this allows anyone who is using the
> translated documentation file and who has a reasonable command of
> English to do the "git log -p ..." command and perhaps contribute a
> patch to update the translation.  So I think this approach would scale
> much better.

The only potential issue I see here is that the final commit ID may not
be known at least until the patch is applied in a maintainer tree.  But
I guess this is not a different problem from existing practices where a
patch references commit IDs.

It sounds like a reasonable, practical approach to me.

Cheers
---Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/