Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/zh_TW: add process/applying-patches Traditional Chinese translation

[葉宸佑]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 08:18:46PM +0800, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > 5. Missing .. _tw_applying_patches: label
>
> This kind of top-level label is not recommended/allowed right now ;-)

You are right, and I checked: doc-guide/sphinx.rst says cross-references
between documents need no special syntax, just the path. Withdrawn --
sorry for sending you the wrong way.

Reading that section also makes my point 6 land differently. The same
text says:

  For most use cases, the former is preferred, as it is cleaner and more
  suited for people reading the source files.  If you come across a
  :doc: usage that isn't adding any value, please feel free to convert
  it to just the document path.

So the two files in 2/2 should converge on README.rst's bare-path form
rather than howto.rst's :doc:, which is the opposite of what I suggested.

> It's kind of weird that this series cannot be applied cleanly with
> Linus' current master tip commit 50d05c7c76c9
>
> Did I did something stupid? Confused..

Nothing stupid -- I hit the same thing trying to apply your series for
review. Your base includes my process/ series, which Alex picked up on
18 August but which has not reached Linus yet, so process/index.rst
differs between the two trees. It applies on Alex's docs-next.

> However, since adding new translations is not our current main goal, I
> will put this series on the to-do list for now.

Makes sense -- it will apply cleanly once Alex's pull request lands, so
there is little to do until then.

> > Would you send that glossary change yourself once v3 lands?
>
> I'd like to do that. If you have time, you can do it in person as well.
> ;-)

If possible, please make the changes while you're at it; I need to
prepare the subsequent patch series.

Thanks,
Chen-Yu

Weijie Yuan <wy@xxxxxxxxx> 於 2026年9月10日週四 下午8:18寫道：
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 11:54:02PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Thanks for taking this on -- and for picking a document that actually
> > matters rather than an easy one. A few things below; the first three
> > produce real breakage, the rest are suggestions.
> >
> > ## Must fix
> >
> > 1. Section levels are flattened (applying-patches.rst:12)
> >
> > The English original uses ++++ for the document title (level 1) and
> > ==== for each section (level 2). The translation uses ==== for both, so
> > the file ends up with eleven parallel h1 headings and no document title.
> > zh_TW/process/code-of-conduct.rst:12 keeps the ++++ form; the same here
> > would fix it.
> >
> > 2. The bold marker at :233 will not render
> >
> >     **不能**套用
> >
> > docutils requires the closing strong marker to be followed by
> > whitespace or punctuation; a CJK character does not count. As written
> > this emits "Inline strong start-string without end-string" and prints
> > the asterisks literally. The existing practice in the tree is to escape
> > with a backslash -- see zh_CN/doc-guide/parse-headers.rst.
> >
> > I checked the other **...**, ``...`` and *...* in the file; this is the
> > only instance that trips the rule (（**fuzz**） and [**y**]es are both
> > fine).
> >
> > 3. index.rst: wrong section, and the TODO entry is still there
> >
> > The entry was added to 「其他材料」 at :123, but the English original
> > lists applying-patches under tools and technical guides
> > (Documentation/process/index.rst:46, after email-clients). More
> > importantly, the 「* applying-patches」 TODOList item at :55 is still
> > present, so the document is listed as both translated and not
> > translated.
> >
> > Moving it into the toctree at :46-49 after email-clients and dropping
> > :55 fixes both.
> >
> > 4. Please drop the :譯者: block
> >
> >     +:譯者:
> >     +
> >     + Weijie Yuan <wy@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > We are in the middle of removing exactly these blocks from the zh_TW
> > tree [1] -- adding a new one now would just mean removing it again.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20260819145808.291567-1-chenyou910331@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> Sure!
>
> Points above copied. My negligence. Will check again.
>
> > ## Suggestions
> >
> > 5. Missing .. _tw_applying_patches: label
> >
> > Every other .rst under zh_TW/process/ carries a .. _tw_*: label, and
> > the English original has .. _applying_patches:. Adding it would let
> > 2/2 use :ref: in howto.rst, matching the eight neighbouring entries in
> > that list instead of standing out as a :doc:.
>
> This kind of top-level label is not recommended/allowed right now ;-)
>
> >
> > 6. Comment alignment at :340
> >
> > One tab puts the comment at column 40; the surrounding lines are at 48,
> > and the English original uses two tabs.
>
> Got it.
>
> > ## Terminology
> >
> > The significant decision here is patch -> 修補程式, used 98 times. I
> > think the direction is right -- 修補程式 is the standard Taiwanese
> > rendering -- but it needs to be handled explicitly, because the
> > existing zh_TW tree has 630 instances of 補丁, including in the two
> > files 2/2 touches. Right now the two terms would sit on either side of
> > the same cross-reference.
> >
> > Could you:
> >
> >   - add patch -> 修補程式 / 补丁 to glossary.rst, and
> >   - say in the commit message that this is a deliberate localisation
>
> Yes, makes sense. I'll do both.
>
> > Migrating the existing 630 instances is a separate question and I do
> > not think it should ride along with this series; I would rather discuss
> > it on its own once this lands.
> >
> > A few smaller ones, measured against what the tree already uses:
> >
> >   :192  指令稿      -> 腳本      (17 files use 腳本; 指令稿 is not
> >                                   used in Taiwan)
>
> Hem, I don't know and use 指令稿 either. So will check later.
>
> >   :165  郵件用戶端  -> 郵件客戶端 (8 files, including email-clients.rst)
> >   :228  回歸        -> 迴歸      (regression; 10 files use 迴歸, 4 use
> >   :259                            回歸 -- 迴歸測試 is the usual form)
>
> Copied.
>
> >   :365
> >
> > On the other side: 中繼資料, 旗標, 模糊比對, 發行候選版, 當機,
> > 正規表示式 are all good Taiwanese renderings. Would you mind adding
> > those to the glossary too while you are there? It would save the next
> > translation from having to guess.
>
> Yes!
>
> > ## On the CJK/ASCII spacing
> >
> > This file puts a space between CJK and Latin throughout, which is the
> > opposite of what the v3 glossary currently says. That is on me: I wrote
> > that entry before you raised the question, and we never actually
> > settled it.
> >
> > Since we both prefer spaces, changing the glossary is the right fix
> > rather than asking you to strip 218 of them. Please leave this file as
> > it is.
> >
> > Would you send that glossary change yourself once v3 lands? You are the
>
>
> > one who spotted the problem, and you are a maintainer here, so it seems
> > more natural coming from you than from me correcting my own entry. What
> > I had in mind:
> >
> >   - new translations: a space between CJK and Latin/digits
> >   - existing files: left alone, no tree-wide normalisation
>
> I'd like to do that. If you have time, you can do it in person as well.
> ;-)
>
> > The second half matters -- normalising the 2581 existing instances
> > would be exactly the kind of churn Jon objected to in the MAINTAINERS
> > thread.
>
> Yes.
>
>
> It's kind of weird that this series cannot be applied cleanly with
> Linus' current master tip commit 50d05c7c76c9 (Merge tag
> 'landlock-7.3-rc3' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mic/linux)
>
> Did I did something stupid? Confused.. But I'll figure it out.
>
> However, since adding new translations is not our current main goal, I
> will put this series on the to-do list for now.
>
> Thanks for your careful review!