Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] docs/zh_CN: improve maintainer/pull-requests translation

[Weijie Yuan]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 11:58:50PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> 
> On 9/5/26 6:06 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > After the last update to the Chinese translation, the English document
> > removed the explicit section label, replaced the configure-git
> > cross-reference with a direct path, and changed "tree for forever" to
> > "tree forever".
> > 
> > Update the translation through commit 3a1b9c4d8edb
> > ("docs: Remove redundant word "for"").
> > 
> > Remove the abandoned Chinese section label and point the configure-git
> > reference to the Chinese translation.
> > 
> > Some of the existing wording did not read very smoothly, so polish a few
> > expressions. And also correct some Git terminology.
> 
> Merge the above two paragraphs into the first paragraph and keep the line
> "Update the translation through commit " at the end of commit message.

Oops, yes. Will do in v3.

> > Signed-off-by: Weijie Yuan <wy@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > I did make quite a few changes to make the reading more fluent. However,
> > to some extent, this might also be unnecessary. If you think there are
> > too many, I will remove the less essential ones. Thanks.
> 
> It's fine.

OK, thanks.

> > ---
> >   .../zh_CN/maintainer/pull-requests.rst             | 127 +++++++++++----------
> >   1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/maintainer/pull-requests.rst b/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/maintainer/pull-requests.rst
> > index ce9725f4674c..4509ec2a2bea 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/maintainer/pull-requests.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/maintainer/pull-requests.rst
> > @@ -5,19 +5,18 @@
> >   :译者:
> >    吴想成 Wu XiangCheng <bobwxc@xxxxxxxx>
> > -
> > -.. _pullrequests_zh:
> > + 袁维杰 Weijie Yuan <wy@xxxxxxxxx>
> I had some internal discussion between zh_CN maintainers. The "译者" and
> “校验” can be kept to motivate old or new contributors to submit more
> patches. How do you think about this?

Actually I agree with this benefit and I did mention this here [1], but
I also can't say no to Jon's viewpoint [2].

Take it further:

>From what I have seen, keeping these two fields does have that benefit.
I also asked some past contributors about this change, and some frankly
admitted that they wanted their names to remain on the page to satisfy
their "vanity". Without these fields, they might move on to other
projects. (I have no comment on that now.)

That said, given Jon's much longer experience, wanting to keep things
simple makes sense too. There have been several requests to update email
addresses over the years, and maintaining them indefinitely seems
unnecessary. As I recall, one recent suggestion was to stop updating
them and leave the old addresses in place to give credit to the
affiliations they represented, such as Alex's alibaba.com address. But
routine changes, such as moving from gmail.com to outlook.com, really
are a nuisance to keep up with.

On the other hand, if we do not accept the update of email addresses,
leave an outdated address there and a reader actually tries to contact
the translator, getting a bounce because the address is no longer valid
is not a good experience either. So it makes sense to leave the primary
responsibility with the people listed in MAINTAINERS. A reader willing
to dig a little deeper can also use git log or git blame to find out who
worked on the translation.

So.. I dunno.? Or as I said, I fully respect your decisions on this,
because I'm finding it a bit hard for me to weigh the trade-offs here.
Maybe we could just let Jon be the BDFL on this one. ;-)

Thanks.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/atDVxZQUiJfsqEBr@xxxxxxxxx/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/87o6cvrs27.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/