linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] Documentation: cve Korean 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]

Message-Id: <20240617231148.64366-1-sj@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:11:48 -0700
From: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>,
	yskelg@...il.com,
	Jinwoo Park <pmnxis@...il.com>,
	Austin Kim <austindh.kim@...il.com>,
	shjy180909@...il.com,
	workflows@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] Documentation: cve Korean translation

Hi John,

On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:27:25 -0600 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:

> yskelg@...il.com writes:
> 
> > From: Yunseong Kim <yskelg@...il.com>
> >
> > This is a Documentation/process/cve korean version.
> >
> > The following changes have been updated based on SeongJae Park’s feedback
> > from the last v4 patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yunseong Kim <yskelg@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/translations/ko_KR/index.rst    |   1 +
> >  .../translations/ko_KR/process/cve.rst        | 107 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 108 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/translations/ko_KR/process/cve.rst
> 
> SeongJae, are you happy with this version?

I have a trivial concern about this patch.  I'm not very confident about it,
though.  I therefore personally shared the concern with Yunseong.  Yunseong
thankfully agreed at some of my points, and he told me that he will post a new
version of this patch.

Please correct me if anything is wrong or missed, Yunseong.

So, I hope this patch to eventually be merged, but I have no strong opinion to
provide either 'Reviewed-by:' or 'Nacked-by:'.

[...]


Thanks,
SJ