On 3/6/23 17:03, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:34:29 -0600, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
On 3/6/23 09:30, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
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.
I see what you mean. I'm sending v2 patch renamed to avoid confusion.
??
Translate Documentation/process/deprecated.rst into Spanish.
Co-developed-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sergio Gonzalez <sergio.collado@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@xxxxxxx>
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... ;-)
But, why doesn't it follow the rule?
The rule is "A Co-Developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer along with the original author. This is useful at times when multiple people work on a single patch."
IMHO this is the case here, but before I send v2 I'll wait to read you again in case we agree at that point.
If you put "From: Sergio" as the first line in the Changelog, like
this submission [1], then the Sob chain would make sense.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20230227222957.24501-2-rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx/
Didn't you forgot to put it there?
Sending v2 :)
Just guessing...
Thanks, Akira
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
Thanks,
Carlos
Thanks,
Carlos
