Re: [PATCH v2] docs/zh_CN: Improve Cinese transolation quality.

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/zh_CN: Improve Cinese transolation quality.

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Tue,  8 Dec 2020 21:16:04 +0800
Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com> wrote:

> Signed-off-by: Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com>
> ---
> Change in v2:
>   - For 'cn_development_coding' part, change back to '是关于编码过程的'
> 
>  .../translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst    | 61 ++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

Thank you for working to improve the documentation!  Please, though,
include a changelog with your patch; what does "improve translation
quality" mean here?

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/zh_CN: Improve Cinese transolation quality.

[Alex Shi]

Reviewed-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>


在 2020/12/8 下午9:16, Ran Wang 写道:
> Signed-off-by: Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com>
> ---
> Change in v2:
>   - For 'cn_development_coding' part, change back to '是关于编码过程的'
> 
>  .../translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst    | 61 ++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst b/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst
> index 10a15f3dc282..f05405d96c51 100644
> --- a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst
> @@ -11,33 +11,35 @@
>  执行摘要
>  --------
>  
> -本节的其余部分涵盖了内核开发过程的范围，以及开发人员及其雇主在这方面可能遇
> -到的各种挫折。内核代码应该合并到正式的（“主线”）内核中有很多原因，包括对用
> -户的自动可用性、多种形式的社区支持以及影响内核开发方向的能力。提供给Linux
> -内核的代码必须在与GPL兼容的许可证下可用。
> +本节的其余部分介绍了内核开发流程相关知识，其中包括开发者及其雇主在这方面可能遇
> +到的各种问题。内核代码合并到官方的（“主线”）仓库会有很多好处，比如能在第一时
> +间让用户获得更新，可以从社区得到多种形式的支持，以及能够以此影响内核未来发展方
> +向。需要注意提供给Linux内核的代码必须是在与GPL兼容的许可证下使用。
>  
> -:ref:`cn_development_process` 介绍了开发过程、内核发布周期和合并窗口的机制。
> -涵盖了补丁开发、审查和合并周期中的各个阶段。有一些关于工具和邮件列表的讨论。
> -鼓励希望开始内核开发的开发人员作为初始练习跟踪并修复bug。
> +:ref:`cn_development_process` 介绍了内核开发流程、发布周期以及合并窗口期相关的
> +机制。同时还讲解了补丁开发、审查和合并周期各个阶段要点。此外还包括一些关于工具
> +和邮件列表的讨论。我们建议那些希望开始内核开发的开发者们以跟踪并修复bug作为初
> +始练习。
>  
>  
> -:ref:`cn_development_early_stage` 包括早期项目规划，重点是尽快让开发社区参与
> +:ref:`cn_development_early_stage` 介绍项目早期的工作规划，重点是尽快让开发社区
> +有机会参与到规划中
>  
> -:ref:`cn_development_coding` 是关于编码过程的；讨论了其他开发人员遇到的几个
> -陷阱。对补丁的一些要求已经涵盖，并且介绍了一些工具，这些工具有助于确保内核
> -补丁是正确的。
> +:ref:`cn_development_coding` 是关于编码过程的；讨论了一些其他开发者曾经走入到
> +的误区。并介绍社区对补丁的要求，同时指导如何通过使用一些工具来帮助确保内核补
> +丁的质量。
>  
> -:ref:`cn_development_posting` 讨论发布补丁以供评审的过程。为了让开发社区
> -认真对待，补丁必须正确格式化和描述，并且必须发送到正确的地方。遵循本节中的
> -建议有助于确保为您的工作提供最好的接纳。
> +:ref:`cn_development_posting` 介绍发布补丁以供评审的流程。补丁只有在符合特定的
> +格式及正确描述，并且发送到正确的地方，开发社区才有可能对其认真审查。遵循本节中
> +的建议有助于确保为您的工作成果提供最好的接纳。
>  
> -:ref:`cn_development_followthrough` 介绍了发布补丁之后发生的事情；该工作
> -在这一点上还远远没有完成。与审阅者一起工作是开发过程中的一个重要部分；本节
> -提供了一些关于如何在这个重要阶段避免问题的提示。当补丁被合并到主线中时，
> -开发人员要注意不要假定任务已经完成。
> +:ref:`cn_development_followthrough` 介绍了提交补丁之后发生的事情；至此工作实际
> +上还远未完成。与审阅者一起合作是开发过程中的重要部分；本节提供了一些关于如何在
> +这个重要阶段避免出现问题的提示。此外，即使当补丁已经被合并到主线中，开发者也不
> +能认为任务就此完成。
>  
>  :ref:`cn_development_advancedtopics` 介绍了两个“高级”主题：
> -使用Git管理补丁和查看其他人发布的补丁。
> +使用Git管理补丁和查看其他人提交的补丁。
>  
>  :ref:`cn_development_conclusion` 总结了有关内核开发的更多信息，附带有带有
>  指向资源的链接.
> @@ -62,19 +64,20 @@ Linux最引人注目的特性之一是这些开发人员可以访问它；任何
>  内核开发周期可以涉及1000多个开发人员，他们为100多个不同的公司
>  （或者根本没有公司）工作。
>  
> -与内核开发社区合作并不是特别困难。但是，尽管如此，许多潜在的贡献者在尝试做
> -内核工作时遇到了困难。内核社区已经发展了自己独特的操作方式，使其能够在每天
> -都要更改数千行代码的环境中顺利运行（并生成高质量的产品）。因此，Linux内核开发
> +与内核开发社区合作并不是特别困难。但是，尽管如此，许多潜在的贡献者在尝试参与
> +内核开发时遇到了困难。内核社区已经发展了自己独特的开发流程，使其能够在每天
> +都要更改数千行代码的环境中顺利运转（并生成高质量的产品）。因此，Linux内核开发
>  过程与专有的开发方法有很大的不同也就不足为奇了。
>  
> -对于新开发人员来说，内核的开发过程可能会让人感到奇怪和恐惧，但这个背后有充分的
> -理由和坚实的经验。一个不了解内核社区的方式的开发人员（或者更糟的是，他们试图
> -抛弃或规避内核社区的方式）会有一个令人沮丧的体验。开发社区, 在帮助那些试图学习
> -的人的同时，没有时间帮助那些不愿意倾听或不关心开发过程的人。
> +对于新开发者来说，内核的开发流程可能会让人感到陌生和望而生畏，但这个背后其实
> +是有充分的理由和坚实的实际经验作支撑。一个不了解内核社区工作方式的开发者（或
> +者更糟的是，如果他们试图抛弃或规避内核社区的方式）将会有一个令人沮丧的体验。
> +毕竟开发社区在帮助那些试图学习的人的同时，没有时间帮助那些不愿意倾听或不关心
> +开发流程的人。
>  
> -希望阅读本文的人能够避免这种令人沮丧的经历。这里有很多材料，但阅读时所做的
> -努力会在短时间内得到回报。开发社区总是需要能让内核变更好的开发人员；下面的
> -文本应该帮助您或为您工作的人员加入我们的社区。
> +希望大家能通过阅读本文来避免那些令人沮丧的经历。这里有很多材料，请相信阅读这
> +些所付出的努力将会在短时间内得到回报。开发社区总是需要那些能让内核变更好的
> +开发者；下面的文章应当能帮助您或为您工作的人加入我们的社区。
>  
>  致谢
>  ----
> 

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/zh_CN: Improve Cinese transolation quality.

[Alex Shi]

在 2020/12/19 上午11:42, Ran Wang 写道:
> Hi Jonathan,
>     
> On Tuesday, December 8, 2020 11:00 PM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>  
>> On Tue,  8 Dec 2020 21:16:04 +0800
>> Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com>
>>> ---
>>> Change in v2:
>>>    - For 'cn_development_coding' part, change back to >'是关于编码过程的'
>>>
>>>   .../translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst    | 61 >++++++++++---------
>>>   1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>> Thank you for working to improve the documentation!  >Please, though,
>> include a changelog with your patch; what does "improve >translation
>> quality" mean here?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> jon
> 
> Sorry I missed your mail.
> 
> Actually I feel difficult to list the change log to describe this (after not I am not a language teacher :) ).
> 
> I would say the original translation looks like a little bit more by machine: English word to Chinese word directly without considering particular scenarios (such as software development related terms we used in Chinese, a little bit different to normal usage maybe). So I tried to re-tell the story in a way more kind of 'human' to make everything clearer for Chinese reader.

Hi Ran,

I don't think you describe correctly for your new translation. And you are not 're-tell story'
for a standard community co-work process, which we don't need. Also the original translation is
not by machine, it's by myself.

What you did right is polishing the Chinese words, make it more fluency and fit better for Chinese
custom, although it costs a bit verboseness and a bit precision.


Thanks
Alex

> 
> Anyway, I am willing to provide you such change log if you could provide me an example for reference (this is my first time to post such patch).
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Ran
> 

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/zh_CN: Improve Cinese transolation quality.

[Alex Shi]

在 2020/12/21 下午8:34, Ran Wang 写道:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> 
> On Monday, December 21, 2020 3:52 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> 
>> 在 2020/12/19 上午11:42, Ran Wang 写道:
>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>      
>>> On Tuesday, December 8, 2020 11:00 PM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>>  
>>>> On Tue,  8 Dec 2020 21:16:04 +0800
>>>> Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ran Wang <gxndwr@outlook.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Change in v2:
>>>>>    - For 'cn_development_coding' part, change back to >'是关于编码过程的'
>>>>>
>>>>>   .../translations/zh_CN/process/1.Intro.rst    | 61 >++++++++++---------
>>>>>   1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for working to improve the documentation!  >Please, though,
>>>> include a changelog with your patch; what does "improve >translation
>>>> quality" mean here?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> jon
>>>
>>> Sorry I missed your mail.
>>>
>>> Actually I feel difficult to list the change log to describe this (after not I am not a language teacher :) ).
>>>
>>> I would say the original translation looks like a little bit more by machine: English word to Chinese word directly without considering particular scenarios (such as software development related terms we used in Chinese, a little bit different to normal usage maybe). So I tried to re-tell the story in a way more kind of 'human' to make everything clearer for Chinese reader.
>>
>> Hi Ran,
>>
>> I don't think you describe correctly for your new translation. And you are not 're-tell story'
>> for a standard community co-work process, which we don't need. Also the original translation is
>> not by machine, it's by myself.
> 
> Sorry, I didn't mean to offend. You are right.

That's all right. I guess, few my translation is easy to be misunderstood, and I own some explantion:
like 2 places:

1, 'There are a great many "reasons" why kernel code should be merged into the ...'
Here if 'reasons' translated as 'benefits/advantage', that would fits better in Chinese
converstion custom. (I don't strong oppose this). but usually we keep 'reasons' original meaning.

2, 'managing patches with git and reviewing patches "posted" by others.' 
Here the 'posted', I did think a lot on '发布' or '提交', It costed me sometime, But finally I used '发布'
not ‘提交’， since the latter is easy to be confused with git 'commit' in Chinese, while patches we hold
here were posted by email, not 'git'.


> 
>> What you did right is polishing the Chinese words, make it more fluency and fit better for Chinese
>> custom, although it costs a bit verboseness and a bit precision.> 
> The word 'polishing' is the perfect word to describe this, thank you.

We are not professional translators or interpreters (although my wife is one). :)
But there is a standards of the Chinese translation, fidelity, fluency, elegence, let's hang on fidelity,
and try best on fluency or elegence. :)


Thanks
Alex