Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 17 Apr 2021 10:47:02 +0800 | From | "Wu X.C." <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 0/2] Add a new translation tool scripts/trslt.py |
| |
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 03:00:36PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Wu XiangCheng <bobwxc@email.cn> writes: > > > Hi all, > > > > This set of patches aim to add a new translation tool - trslt.py, which > > can control the transltions version corresponding to source files. > > > > For a long time, kernel documentation translations lacks a way to control the > > version corresponding to the source files. If you translate a file and then > > someone updates the source file, there will be a problem. It's hard to know > > which version the existing translation corresponds to, and even harder to sync > > them. > > > > The common way now is to check the date, but this is not exactly accurate, > > especially for documents that are often updated. And some translators write > > corresponding commit ID in the commit log for reference, it is a good way, > > but still a little troublesome. > > > > Thus, the purpose of ``trslt.py`` is to add a new annotating tag to the file > > to indicate corresponding version of the source file:: > > > > .. translation_origin_commit: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > The script will automatically copy file and generate tag when creating new > > translation, and give update suggestions based on those tags when updating > > translations. > > > > More details please read doc in [Patch 2/2]. > > So, like Federico, I'm unconvinced about putting this into the > translated text itself. This is metadata, and I'd put it with the rest > of the metadata. My own suggestion would be a tag like: > > Translates: 6161a4b18a66 ("docs: reporting-issues: make people CC the regressions list") > > It would be an analogue to the Fixes tag in this regard; you could have > more than one of them if need be.
Yes, that's also a good idea rather than add a tag to text itself.
> > I'm not sure we really need a script in the kernel tree for this; it > seems like what you really want is some sort of git commit hook. That > said, if you come up with something useful, we can certainly find a > place for it.
Emmm, thought again.
Maybe we just need a doc to tell people recommended practice, just put a script or hook in the doc.
Use it or not, depend on themselves. That's may easier, but I'm worried about whether this loose approach will work better.
Thanks!
Wu X.C. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |