Re: [PATCH] Replace HTTP links with HTTPS ones: Documentation/translations/it_IT

[Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 9:02 AM Alexander A. Klimov
<grandmaster@al2klimov.de> wrote:
>
> Is any of you familiar with Golang?

Don't worry about that! I'd expect seasoned C programmers to be able
to read Go (or near languages) -- at least to have a general idea of
what an algorithm does.

It is not APL, after all :-)

>
> @Maintainers Would any of you actually review like this? If yes, is the
> pseudo-code not enough?

Well, Kees already mentioned he would like to see it :-) As he said,
it is usually the way for bulk patches to present the
algorithm/semantic patch/etc. that was used.

It is also useful to have it around so that it can be reused/reapplied
later on, too.

> I didn't log that link-by-link. Maybe because I also didn't follow plain
> HTTP redirects while opening HTTPS links. Maybe it even matched, but was
> added after I made the changes.

It would be nice to have a list of links which cannot be converted,
since nowadays they are likely to be the exception rather than the
rule.

> * Linus *didn't even respond* (at least I didn't receive anything) to my
> catch-them-all patch at all, not even like please not as .gz attachment
> or please split by subsystem

Please take into account that LKML volume is huge and Linus (like
everybody else) only reads a small subset. Further, as a general rule,
Linus shouldn't be picking individual patches to begin with because
that skips the review tree.

Cheers,
Miguel