Re: [PATCH] docs/zh_CN: update maintainer/configure-git.rst translation

Weijie Yuan <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 09:59:47AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2026/8/23 23:13, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > Upstream documented the common 'git tag -s' workflow and cleaned up
> > unneeded RST markup. It briefly updated the automatic lore Link: hook
> > for Git 2.41 and HTTPS, then removed that guidance because Link: tags
> > should only point to useful additional information.
> > 
> > Add a SPDX-License-Identifier.
> > 
> > Remove a useless top-of-file label, as Jon always tries to do.
> > 
> > Update the translation through commit 944df7a31452
> > ("docs: update the guidance for Link: tags").
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Weijie Yuan<[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Hi Jon, I added a SPDX-License-Identifier for this file while the
> > original English one doesn't have one yet. Should I do that? / Is it
> > "legal" to do so? , if XiangCheng would be happy with what I'm doing.
> > 
> 
> I am not Jon. but usually changes should start from the original file. we
> don't add or change anything different from it.

Thanks, Alex. The reason why I asked Jon is because I have witnessed him
make some comments on this matter several times. And of course, you also
have much more experience. ;-)

And it seems that I haven't quite figured out how to handle this
identifier in different situations for our translation.

I also asked this question on another topic. The original English text
at that time did not have this identifier, but the Chinese translation
added it:

Quote [1]:

| The SPDX identifier of this translation was added at its birth, while
| the SPDX identifier of its original English version was added this year
| 2026. Although it has been added, I'm quite curious about whether it is
| "legal" to add the identifier on top of the Chinese translation while
| the English original does not have one back in 2023.
| 
| I know Jon has been a little bit careful about it, so I'd better leave
| my thoughts here for future reference.
| 
| Thanks.

Also, I need to take a closer look at the description of this
identifier.

Ultimately, however, I agree that our top principle should be to
maintain consistency with the original text.

Thanks!

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/[email protected]/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.