linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc:it_IT: translation for kernel-hacking

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: <20180727153424.7bba09ce@lwn.net>
Date:   Fri, 27 Jul 2018 15:34:24 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>
Cc:     linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alessia Mantegazza <amantegazza@...a.pv.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc:it_IT: translation for kernel-hacking

On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 09:46:47 +0200
Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it> wrote:

> Generally speaking, how readers can understand 
> how old is a document or if it still correct (in the sense that the document 
> and the correspondent code are in sync)? 

We don't have a good answer to that, really.  Some of our docs are
up-to-the-second current, and others still talk about how to find out
which vacuum tube has gone bad in your system.  It's a trap for our
readers, unfortunately.  My plan has been to try to bring some more order
to Documentation/ first, hopefully cleaning things up a bit on the way.

> How this is handled? Just by enforcing people to update 
> the documentation when they change, for example, an interface that has been 
> documented?

magari ... talk of such enforcement is a recurring thing, but nobody has
the will to actually do that.  

jon