linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] docs/sp_SP: Add process deprecated translation

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

Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2023 00:30:26 +0900
From:   Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
To:     Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@....com>
Cc:     corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sergio.collado@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs/sp_SP: Add process deprecated translation

On 2023/03/07 0:20, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> Hello Akira,
> 
> On 3/6/23 09:13, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> Hi Carlos,
>>
>> Minor nits in the Subject and Sob area.
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 07:44:20 -0600, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
>>> Subject: [PATCH] docs/sp_SP: Add process deprecated translation
>>
>> This summary looks ambiguous to me.
>>
>> Maybe
>>
>>     docs/sp_SP: Add translation of process/deprecated
> 
> This summary follows the same format followed in the past. Some examples:
> 
> docs/sp_SP: Add process coding-style translation
> docs/sp_SP: Add process magic-number translation
> docs/sp_SP: Add process programming-language translation
> docs/sp_SP: Add process email-clients translation

Let me explain why "Add process deprecated translation" looks
ambiguous.

"deprecated translation" can be interpreted as "some translation
which is deprecated".
Of course you don't need to agree.

> 
>>
>> ??
>>
>>> Translate Documentation/process/deprecated.rst into Spanish.
>>>
>>> Co-developed-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@....com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sergio Gonzalez <sergio.collado@...il.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@....com>
>>
>> To me, Co-developed-by: from the author of the patch looks
>> strange, because it is obvious the author did some development on
>> the patch.
>>
> 
> No, we both worked on this patch so Co-developed-by: is the appropriate
> tagging. That being said, Sergio translated more than I did, so I put
> him as sole Translator in the document itself.

Hmm, anyway I don't think you are following the rule of Co-developed-by:
explained in submitting-patches.rst.

Again, you don't need to agree... ;-)

        Thanks, Akira

> 
>> Which is your intent:
>>
>>     Author: Carlos
>>     Co-developer: Sergio
>>
>> , or
>>
>>     Author: Sergio
>>     Co-developer: Carlos
>>
>> ???
>>
>>          Thanks, Akira
>>
>>> ---
>>>   .../translations/sp_SP/process/deprecated.rst | 381 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>   .../translations/sp_SP/process/index.rst      |   1 +
>>>   2 files changed, 382 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/translations/sp_SP/process/deprecated.rst
>> [...]
> 
> Thanks,
> Carlos