[PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Chen-Yu Yeh]

Translate PRC tech terms into Taiwanese tech terms (e.g.,
內核 -> 核心, 代碼 -> 程式碼, 軟件 -> 軟體) to improve
readability for local developers. Also, rephrase several
awkward sentences to make the document more fluent.

Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <dzm91@hust.edu.cn>
Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Yeh <chenyou910331@gmail.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Update Signed-off-by to use full real name.
- Add Reviewed-by tag from Dongliang Mu.

 .../zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst            | 45 +++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst b/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
index d1634421b62c..823969cf793d 100644
--- a/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
+++ b/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
@@ -14,42 +14,41 @@
 
 .. _tw_development_conclusion:
 
-更多信息
+更多資訊
 ========
 
-關於Linux內核開發和相關主題的信息來源很多。首先是在內核源代碼分發中找到的
-文檔目錄。頂級
+關於Linux核心開發和相關主題的資訊來源很多。首先是在核心原始碼分發中找到的
+文件目錄。頂級
 :ref:`Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/howto.rst <tw_process_howto>`
 文件是一個重要的起點；
 :ref:`Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/submitting-patches.rst <tw_submittingpatches>`
-也是所有內核開發人員都應該閱讀的內容。許多內部內核API都是使用kerneldoc機制
-記錄的；“make htmldocs”或“make pdfdocs”可用於以HTML或PDF格式生成這些文檔
-（儘管某些發行版提供的tex版本會遇到內部限制，無法正確處理文檔）。
-
-不同的網站在各個細節層次上討論內核開發。本文作者想謙虛地建議用 https://lwn.net/
-作爲來源；有關許多特定內核主題的信息可以通過以下網址的 LWN 內核索引找到：
+也是所有核心開發人員都應該閱讀的內容。許多內部核心API都是使用kerneldoc機制
+記錄的；“make htmldocs”或“make pdfdocs”可用於以HTML或PDF格式生成這些文件
+（儘管某些發行版提供的tex版本會遇到內部限制，無法正確處理文件）。
 
+不同的網站在各個細節層次上討論核心開發。本文作者想謙虛地建議用 https://lwn.net/
+作爲來源；有關許多特定核心主題的資訊可以通過以下網址的 LWN 核心索引找到:
   http://lwn.net/kernel/index/
 
-除此之外，內核開發人員的一個寶貴資源是：
+除此之外，核心開發人員的一個寶貴資源是：
 
   https://kernelnewbies.org/
 
-當然，也不應該忘記 https://kernel.org/ ，這是內核發佈信息的最終位置。
+當然，也不應該忘記 https://kernel.org/ ，這是核心發佈資訊的最終位置。
 
-關於內核開發有很多書：
+關於核心開發有很多書：
 
   《Linux設備驅動程序》第三版（Jonathan Corbet、Alessandro Rubini和Greg Kroah Hartman）
   線上版本在 http://lwn.net/kernel/ldd3/
 
-  《Linux內核設計與實現》（Robert Love）
+  《Linux核心設計與實現》（Robert Love）
 
-  《深入理解Linux內核》(Daniel Bovet和Marco Cesati）
+  《深入理解Linux核心》(Daniel Bovet和Marco Cesati）
 
 然而，所有這些書都有一個共同的缺點：它們上架時就往往有些過時，而且已經上架
-一段時間了。不過，在那裏還是可以找到相當多的好信息。
+一段時間了。不過，在那裏還是可以找到相當多的好資訊。
 
-有關git的文檔，請訪問：
+有關git的文件，請訪問：
 
   https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/
 
@@ -58,16 +57,16 @@
 結論
 ====
 
-祝賀所有通過這篇冗長的文檔的人。希望它能夠幫助您理解Linux內核是如何開發的，
+祝賀所有通過這篇冗長的文件的人。希望它能夠幫助您理解Linux核心是如何開發的，
 以及您如何參與這個過程。
 
-最後，重要的是參與。任何開源軟件項目都不會超過其貢獻者投入其中的總和。Linux
-內核的發展速度和以前一樣快，因爲它得到了大量開發人員的幫助，他們都在努力使它
-變得更好。內核是一個最成功的例子，說明了當成千上萬的人爲了一個共同的目標一起
+最後，重要的是參與。任何開源軟體專案都不會超過其貢獻者投入其中的總和。Linux
+核心的發展速度和以前一樣快，因爲它得到了大量開發人員的幫助，他們都在努力使它
+變得更好。核心是一個最成功的例子，說明了當成千上萬的人爲了一個共同的目標一起
 工作時，可以做出什麼。
 
-不過，內核總是可以從更大的開發人員基礎中獲益。總有更多的工作要做。但是同樣
-重要的是，Linux生態系統中的大多數其他參與者可以通過爲內核做出貢獻而受益。使
-代碼進入主線是提高代碼質量、降低維護和分發成本、提高對內核開發方向的影響程度
+不過，核心總是可以從更大的開發人員基礎中獲益。總有更多的工作要做。但是同樣
+重要的是，Linux生態系統中的大多數其他參與者可以通過爲核心做出貢獻而受益。使
+程式碼進入主線是提高程式碼品質、降低維護和分發成本、提高對核心開發方向的影響程度
 等的關鍵。這是一種共贏的局面。啓動你的編輯器，來加入我們吧；你會非常受歡迎的。
 
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[葉宸佑]

Gentle ping.

This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
I might have missed?

Thanks,
Chen-Yu

Chen-Yu Yeh <chenyou910331@gmail.com> 於 2026年6月3日週三 下午4:26寫道：
>
> Translate PRC tech terms into Taiwanese tech terms (e.g.,
> 內核 -> 核心, 代碼 -> 程式碼, 軟件 -> 軟體) to improve
> readability for local developers. Also, rephrase several
> awkward sentences to make the document more fluent.
>
> Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <dzm91@hust.edu.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Yeh <chenyou910331@gmail.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Update Signed-off-by to use full real name.
> - Add Reviewed-by tag from Dongliang Mu.
>
>  .../zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst            | 45 +++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst b/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
> index d1634421b62c..823969cf793d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
> @@ -14,42 +14,41 @@
>
>  .. _tw_development_conclusion:
>
> -更多信息
> +更多資訊
>  ========
>
> -關於Linux內核開發和相關主題的信息來源很多。首先是在內核源代碼分發中找到的
> -文檔目錄。頂級
> +關於Linux核心開發和相關主題的資訊來源很多。首先是在核心原始碼分發中找到的
> +文件目錄。頂級
>  :ref:`Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/howto.rst <tw_process_howto>`
>  文件是一個重要的起點；
>  :ref:`Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/submitting-patches.rst <tw_submittingpatches>`
> -也是所有內核開發人員都應該閱讀的內容。許多內部內核API都是使用kerneldoc機制
> -記錄的；“make htmldocs”或“make pdfdocs”可用於以HTML或PDF格式生成這些文檔
> -（儘管某些發行版提供的tex版本會遇到內部限制，無法正確處理文檔）。
> -
> -不同的網站在各個細節層次上討論內核開發。本文作者想謙虛地建議用 https://lwn.net/
> -作爲來源；有關許多特定內核主題的信息可以通過以下網址的 LWN 內核索引找到：
> +也是所有核心開發人員都應該閱讀的內容。許多內部核心API都是使用kerneldoc機制
> +記錄的；“make htmldocs”或“make pdfdocs”可用於以HTML或PDF格式生成這些文件
> +（儘管某些發行版提供的tex版本會遇到內部限制，無法正確處理文件）。
>
> +不同的網站在各個細節層次上討論核心開發。本文作者想謙虛地建議用 https://lwn.net/
> +作爲來源；有關許多特定核心主題的資訊可以通過以下網址的 LWN 核心索引找到:
>    http://lwn.net/kernel/index/
>
> -除此之外，內核開發人員的一個寶貴資源是：
> +除此之外，核心開發人員的一個寶貴資源是：
>
>    https://kernelnewbies.org/
>
> -當然，也不應該忘記 https://kernel.org/ ，這是內核發佈信息的最終位置。
> +當然，也不應該忘記 https://kernel.org/ ，這是核心發佈資訊的最終位置。
>
> -關於內核開發有很多書：
> +關於核心開發有很多書：
>
>    《Linux設備驅動程序》第三版（Jonathan Corbet、Alessandro Rubini和Greg Kroah Hartman）
>    線上版本在 http://lwn.net/kernel/ldd3/
>
> -  《Linux內核設計與實現》（Robert Love）
> +  《Linux核心設計與實現》（Robert Love）
>
> -  《深入理解Linux內核》(Daniel Bovet和Marco Cesati）
> +  《深入理解Linux核心》(Daniel Bovet和Marco Cesati）
>
>  然而，所有這些書都有一個共同的缺點：它們上架時就往往有些過時，而且已經上架
> -一段時間了。不過，在那裏還是可以找到相當多的好信息。
> +一段時間了。不過，在那裏還是可以找到相當多的好資訊。
>
> -有關git的文檔，請訪問：
> +有關git的文件，請訪問：
>
>    https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/
>
> @@ -58,16 +57,16 @@
>  結論
>  ====
>
> -祝賀所有通過這篇冗長的文檔的人。希望它能夠幫助您理解Linux內核是如何開發的，
> +祝賀所有通過這篇冗長的文件的人。希望它能夠幫助您理解Linux核心是如何開發的，
>  以及您如何參與這個過程。
>
> -最後，重要的是參與。任何開源軟件項目都不會超過其貢獻者投入其中的總和。Linux
> -內核的發展速度和以前一樣快，因爲它得到了大量開發人員的幫助，他們都在努力使它
> -變得更好。內核是一個最成功的例子，說明了當成千上萬的人爲了一個共同的目標一起
> +最後，重要的是參與。任何開源軟體專案都不會超過其貢獻者投入其中的總和。Linux
> +核心的發展速度和以前一樣快，因爲它得到了大量開發人員的幫助，他們都在努力使它
> +變得更好。核心是一個最成功的例子，說明了當成千上萬的人爲了一個共同的目標一起
>  工作時，可以做出什麼。
>
> -不過，內核總是可以從更大的開發人員基礎中獲益。總有更多的工作要做。但是同樣
> -重要的是，Linux生態系統中的大多數其他參與者可以通過爲內核做出貢獻而受益。使
> -代碼進入主線是提高代碼質量、降低維護和分發成本、提高對內核開發方向的影響程度
> +不過，核心總是可以從更大的開發人員基礎中獲益。總有更多的工作要做。但是同樣
> +重要的是，Linux生態系統中的大多數其他參與者可以通過爲核心做出貢獻而受益。使
> +程式碼進入主線是提高程式碼品質、降低維護和分發成本、提高對核心開發方向的影響程度
>  等的關鍵。這是一種共贏的局面。啓動你的編輯器，來加入我們吧；你會非常受歡迎的。
>
> --
> 2.43.0
>

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 04:49:30PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Gentle ping.
> 
> This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
> Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
> I might have missed?

Hi Chenyou,

I think currently having Alex apply your patch is a temporary measure,
because the maintainer of traditional Chinese seems unlikely to be
available in the near future.

Outside the patch itself, I noticed that Traditional Chinese is actually
in a state of stagnation, which makes me think that receiving such
patches is a temporary solution rather than a long-term fix.

As Jonathan said, "...But there does come a point where a translation
is so obsolete that it does more harm than good and there are no
prospects of it being updated." 

So, after a period of about two years of stagnation, the Traditional
Chinese documents seem to have really reached an unreadable state. This
is something we don't want to see, but we must accept the reality and
then take action. Please note that I have no intention of offending
Haowen. On the contrary, I am definitely grateful for all that he has
done.

I did some interactions with one of the L10n Taiwan team (who are
involved with Git L10n) [1] in their telegram channel a few days before,
but sadly they said the biggest problems are:

  1. No one is willing to take over. (hey, I totally understand)
  2. There are different opinions on translation. (I don't know the
     deeper details)

Besides, I'm also very curious about how exactly we define the position
of traditional Chinese or zh_TW. From my rough observation, the existing
documents merely performed a simple conversion between simplified and
traditional Chinese, without taking into account the local expressions
specific to Taiwan. Therefore, that's why we are receiving the patch
here and commit aba18be23f14 ("docs/zh_TW: replace 接口 with 介面 in stable-api-nonsense.rst")
(Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I have not got into many
translated pages)

So if we are doing zh_TW instead of a direct simplified and traditional
Chinese conversion, I don't think we can handle this properly without
the help of Taiwanese friends.

Of course, I feel quite ashamed that I'm saying these above here without
having made any substantial contributions to this community, sorry.

Could we discuss this matter in another thread? Very sorry Chenyou, what
I'm saying is completely unrelated to the patch itself.

Finally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Haowen.

Thanks,
Weijie

[1] https://l10n.tw/

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:00:54PM +0800, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 04:49:30PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Gentle ping.
> > 
> > This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
> > Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
> > I might have missed?
> 
> Hi Chenyou,

Sorry, I think you will prefer being called Chen-Yu instead :-)

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Dongliang Mu]

On 7/10/26 9:00 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 04:49:30PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
>> Gentle ping.
>>
>> This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
>> Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
>> I might have missed?
> Hi Chenyou,
>
> I think currently having Alex apply your patch is a temporary measure,
> because the maintainer of traditional Chinese seems unlikely to be
> available in the near future.

I can help review patches in traditional Chinese. With the help of LLM, 
it is fine for me to handle local terminologies in zh_TW.

Dongliang Mu

>
> Outside the patch itself, I noticed that Traditional Chinese is actually
> in a state of stagnation, which makes me think that receiving such
> patches is a temporary solution rather than a long-term fix.
>
> As Jonathan said, "...But there does come a point where a translation
> is so obsolete that it does more harm than good and there are no
> prospects of it being updated."
>
> So, after a period of about two years of stagnation, the Traditional
> Chinese documents seem to have really reached an unreadable state. This
> is something we don't want to see, but we must accept the reality and
> then take action. Please note that I have no intention of offending
> Haowen. On the contrary, I am definitely grateful for all that he has
> done.
>
> I did some interactions with one of the L10n Taiwan team (who are
> involved with Git L10n) [1] in their telegram channel a few days before,
> but sadly they said the biggest problems are:
>
>    1. No one is willing to take over. (hey, I totally understand)
>    2. There are different opinions on translation. (I don't know the
>       deeper details)
>
> Besides, I'm also very curious about how exactly we define the position
> of traditional Chinese or zh_TW. From my rough observation, the existing
> documents merely performed a simple conversion between simplified and
> traditional Chinese, without taking into account the local expressions
> specific to Taiwan. Therefore, that's why we are receiving the patch
> here and commit aba18be23f14 ("docs/zh_TW: replace 接口 with 介面 in stable-api-nonsense.rst")
> (Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I have not got into many
> translated pages)
>
> So if we are doing zh_TW instead of a direct simplified and traditional
> Chinese conversion, I don't think we can handle this properly without
> the help of Taiwanese friends.
>
> Of course, I feel quite ashamed that I'm saying these above here without
> having made any substantial contributions to this community, sorry.
>
> Could we discuss this matter in another thread? Very sorry Chenyou, what
> I'm saying is completely unrelated to the patch itself.
>
> Finally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Haowen.
>
> Thanks,
> Weijie
>
> [1] https://l10n.tw/

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[葉宸佑]

Hi Weijie,

> I think currently having Alex apply your patch is a temporary measure,
> because the maintainer of traditional Chinese seems unlikely to be
> available in the near future.

Thanks for taking the time to explain the bigger picture in such detail.
Details. I understand the concern: accepting individual fixes doesn’t…
Solve the underlying problem that zh_TW documents have been facing.
Stagnant for a long time.
> So if we are doing zh_TW instead of a direct simplified and
> traditional Chinese conversion, I don't think we can handle this
> properly without the help of Taiwanese friends.

For what it's worth, I am from Taiwan and a native zh_TW speaker.
That is actually what motivated this patch: much of the current text
reads like converted zh_CN rather than natural Taiwanese Mandarin,
and 8.Conclusion was simply where I started. Within my ability as a
newcomer, I would be happy to help review zh_TW patches or keep
improving the process/ documents, if that is useful to the discussion
you are planning to start.

This is also my first kernel patch, so naturally I would be glad to
see it applied. That said, I fully respect whatever direction you and
the docs maintainers decide is best for zh_TW as a whole, and I am
happy to rebase or adjust it if the discussion lands somewhere that
requires changes.

> Sorry, I think you will prefer being called Chen-Yu instead :-)

No worries at all :-)

Hi Dongliang,

> I can help review patches in traditional Chinese. With the help of
> LLM, it is fine for me to handle local terminologies in zh_TW.

Thank you for offering to help with review, and thanks again for your
comments on v1.

Thanks,
Chen-Yu

Dongliang Mu <dzm91@hust.edu.cn> 於 2026年7月10日週五 下午9:16寫道：
>
>
> On 7/10/26 9:00 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 04:49:30PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> >> Gentle ping.
> >>
> >> This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
> >> Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
> >> I might have missed?
> > Hi Chenyou,
> >
> > I think currently having Alex apply your patch is a temporary measure,
> > because the maintainer of traditional Chinese seems unlikely to be
> > available in the near future.
>
> I can help review patches in traditional Chinese. With the help of LLM,
> it is fine for me to handle local terminologies in zh_TW.
>
> Dongliang Mu
>
> >
> > Outside the patch itself, I noticed that Traditional Chinese is actually
> > in a state of stagnation, which makes me think that receiving such
> > patches is a temporary solution rather than a long-term fix.
> >
> > As Jonathan said, "...But there does come a point where a translation
> > is so obsolete that it does more harm than good and there are no
> > prospects of it being updated."
> >
> > So, after a period of about two years of stagnation, the Traditional
> > Chinese documents seem to have really reached an unreadable state. This
> > is something we don't want to see, but we must accept the reality and
> > then take action. Please note that I have no intention of offending
> > Haowen. On the contrary, I am definitely grateful for all that he has
> > done.
> >
> > I did some interactions with one of the L10n Taiwan team (who are
> > involved with Git L10n) [1] in their telegram channel a few days before,
> > but sadly they said the biggest problems are:
> >
> >    1. No one is willing to take over. (hey, I totally understand)
> >    2. There are different opinions on translation. (I don't know the
> >       deeper details)
> >
> > Besides, I'm also very curious about how exactly we define the position
> > of traditional Chinese or zh_TW. From my rough observation, the existing
> > documents merely performed a simple conversion between simplified and
> > traditional Chinese, without taking into account the local expressions
> > specific to Taiwan. Therefore, that's why we are receiving the patch
> > here and commit aba18be23f14 ("docs/zh_TW: replace 接口 with 介面 in stable-api-nonsense.rst")
> > (Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I have not got into many
> > translated pages)
> >
> > So if we are doing zh_TW instead of a direct simplified and traditional
> > Chinese conversion, I don't think we can handle this properly without
> > the help of Taiwanese friends.
> >
> > Of course, I feel quite ashamed that I'm saying these above here without
> > having made any substantial contributions to this community, sorry.
> >
> > Could we discuss this matter in another thread? Very sorry Chenyou, what
> > I'm saying is completely unrelated to the patch itself.
> >
> > Finally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Haowen.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Weijie
> >
> > [1] https://l10n.tw/
>

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 02:01:46AM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Hi Weijie,
> 
> > I think currently having Alex apply your patch is a temporary measure,
> > because the maintainer of traditional Chinese seems unlikely to be
> > available in the near future.
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to explain the bigger picture in such detail.
> Details. I understand the concern: accepting individual fixes doesn’t…
> Solve the underlying problem that zh_TW documents have been facing.
> Stagnant for a long time.

So I'm very glad and grateful to hear more people's opinions. Of course,
that's only my wish, I have no intention of forcing anyone.

> > So if we are doing zh_TW instead of a direct simplified and
> > traditional Chinese conversion, I don't think we can handle this
> > properly without the help of Taiwanese friends.
> 
> For what it's worth, I am from Taiwan and a native zh_TW speaker.
> That is actually what motivated this patch: much of the current text
> reads like converted zh_CN rather than natural Taiwanese Mandarin,

So, back to my confusion again, and quote myself:

How exactly we define the position of Traditional Chinese or zh_TW?

  1. Simple conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese
     characters
  2. Taiwanese localized traditional Chinese

This issue needs to be confirmed by the senior maintenance personnel.
(I will review the archives to confirm. If there is already a clear
definition, please forgive me.)

> and 8.Conclusion was simply where I started. Within my ability as a
> newcomer, I would be happy to help review zh_TW patches or keep
> improving the process/ documents, if that is useful to the discussion
> you are planning to start.

If we are conducting the localization of the traditional Chinese version
for Taiwan, then it would be a good idea to start by continuing
identifying these terminology issues now. However, for such similar
terminology issues, using a series of patches in bulk is better than
sending out one word correction at a time, like previous similar single
patches.

> This is also my first kernel patch, so naturally I would be glad to
> see it applied. That said, I fully respect whatever direction you and
> the docs maintainers decide is best for zh_TW as a whole, and I am
> happy to rebase or adjust it if the discussion lands somewhere that
> requires changes.

Congrats! You have made your first step.

btw, I have no say in any decision, i.e. my proposed direction has no
effect at all. I respect maintainers' decision. At the same time, I feel
ashamed that I haven't made any contribution yet.

> > I can help review patches in traditional Chinese. With the help of
> > LLM, it is fine for me to handle local terminologies in zh_TW.
> 
> Thank you for offering to help with review, and thanks again for your
> comments on v1.
> 
> Thanks,
> Chen-Yu

Yes, thank you very much, Dongliang! But it seems that finding a more
reasonable workflow is the best way to solve the problem. This would
also relieve the burden on our reviewers. The current situation might
not be too bad, but if it keeps going like this, it could be a problem.

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Jonathan Corbet]

Weijie Yuan <wy@wyuan.org> writes:

> How exactly we define the position of Traditional Chinese or zh_TW?
>
>   1. Simple conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese
>      characters
>   2. Taiwanese localized traditional Chinese
>
> This issue needs to be confirmed by the senior maintenance personnel.
> (I will review the archives to confirm. If there is already a clear
> definition, please forgive me.)

"Senior maintenance personnel" in this case is the people who actually
step up to maintain this translation.  There is no higher level of
authority that needs to somehow sign off on it.  The existing
translation is essentially abandoned; if somebody wants to carry it
forward -- and stay with it -- with a shift in focus, I think that is
just fine.

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 02:04:26PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Weijie Yuan <wy@wyuan.org> writes:
> 
> > How exactly we define the position of Traditional Chinese or zh_TW?
> >
> >   1. Simple conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese
> >      characters
> >   2. Taiwanese localized traditional Chinese
> >
> > This issue needs to be confirmed by the senior maintenance personnel.
> > (I will review the archives to confirm. If there is already a clear
> > definition, please forgive me.)
> 
> "Senior maintenance personnel" in this case is the people who actually
> step up to maintain this translation.  There is no higher level of
> authority that needs to somehow sign off on it.

Yeah, so, due to the current special circumstances, I actually mean that
I want to seek the opinions of the Simplified Chinese team, and then
finally have you Ack.

> The existing translation is essentially abandoned; if somebody wants
> to carry it forward -- and stay with it -- with a shift in focus, I
> think that is just fine.

Yes, hope that the following discussion will lead to a consensus.

Thanks,
Weijie

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Alex Shi]

On 2026/7/12 01:21, Weijie Yuan wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I am from Taiwan and a native zh_TW speaker.
>> That is actually what motivated this patch: much of the current text
>> reads like converted zh_CN rather than natural Taiwanese Mandarin,
> So, back to my confusion again, and quote myself:
> 
> How exactly we define the position of Traditional Chinese or zh_TW?
> 
>    1. Simple conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese
>       characters
>    2. Taiwanese localized traditional Chinese
> 
> This issue needs to be confirmed by the senior maintenance personnel.
> (I will review the archives to confirm. If there is already a clear
> definition, please forgive me.)

Hi Weijie,

Regarding this issue, we also have Hong Kong and Macau Traditional 
Chinese. While they are mutually intelligible with Taiwanese Chinese, 
there are slight differences. If a Taiwan-specific Traditional Chinese 
translation is required, does this imply that we would also need other 
corresponding localized translations? This is similar to English—the 
English used in the UK, the US, Australia, and so on all differ 
slightly, yet the kernel documentation does not maintain separate 
versions for different countries.

Furthermore, aside from a few differences in computing terminology, 
there are no significant differences between Taiwanese Chinese and 
Mainland Chinese that would lead to misunderstandings. In fact, many of 
the current Simplified Chinese translations were contributed by people 
from Taiwan, like Haowen and others. To avoid scattering our efforts, I 
suggest we minimize fragmentation as much as possible. When it comes to 
technical documentation translation, not literary translation, a 
straightforward, unadorned, and free from misunderstandings is the best 
translation and easy to maintain.
Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.

Thanks
Alex

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Sun, Jul 12, 2026 at 12:33:36PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 2026/7/12 01:21, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, I am from Taiwan and a native zh_TW speaker.
> > > That is actually what motivated this patch: much of the current text
> > > reads like converted zh_CN rather than natural Taiwanese Mandarin,
> > So, back to my confusion again, and quote myself:
> > 
> > How exactly we define the position of Traditional Chinese or zh_TW?
> > 
> >    1. Simple conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese
> >       characters
> >    2. Taiwanese localized traditional Chinese
> > 
> > This issue needs to be confirmed by the senior maintenance personnel.
> > (I will review the archives to confirm. If there is already a clear
> > definition, please forgive me.)
> 
> Hi Weijie,
> 
> Regarding this issue, we also have Hong Kong and Macau Traditional
> Chinese. While they are mutually intelligible with Taiwanese Chinese,
> there are slight differences. If a Taiwan-specific Traditional Chinese
> translation is required, does this imply that we would also need other
> corresponding localized translations? This is similar to English-the
> English used in the UK, the US, Australia, and so on all differ
> slightly, yet the kernel documentation does not maintain separate
> versions for different countries.

Hi Alex,

Agreed, so I can understand that your point is that Traditional Chinese
(Taiwan) actually doesn't have much practical use?

> Furthermore, aside from a few differences in computing terminology,
> there are no significant differences between Taiwanese Chinese and
> Mainland Chinese that would lead to misunderstandings.

Agreed. 

> In fact, many of the current Simplified Chinese translations were
> contributed by people from Taiwan, like Haowen and others.

Sorry, but I guess he is very likely not from Taiwan.

  1. Based on the recent several patches, his initial translation was
  merely a simple conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese
  characters, without taking into account the local language expressions
  specific to Taiwan. If he were from Taiwan, many obvious linguistic
  habits would surely have been noticed, such as "软件" vs. "軟體".

  2. His previous email domain shows he is studying in the mainland.

  3. His personal blog is written in simplified chinese.

Of course, I have no intention of intruding on others' privacy. I just
merely made a brief observation.

> To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
> as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
> translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
> and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
> maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.

Absolutely agreed. These minor issues in expression habits, of course,
will not have much impact on reading.

Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.

Thanks,
Weijie

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[葉宸佑]

Hi Weijie,

> I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
> or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
> the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
> Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)

Yes, exactly. For both v1 and v2 I ran get_maintainer.pl, which only
lists Hu Haowen and the mailing lists for zh_TW files, so Alex and the
zh_CN team were never on cc.

> Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
> patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
> might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
> Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
> near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
> new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.

Before it comes to that: I would like to step up and help carry zh_TW
forward. I am a native zh_TW speaker from Taiwan, and I understand
this means staying with it, not a one-off effort.

Dongliang, since you kindly offered to help review zh_TW patches:
would you be open to doing this together -- either as co-maintainers,
or with me listed as a reviewer (R:) first if that is a more
reasonable starting point for a newcomer?

> > To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
> > as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
> > translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
> > and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
> > maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.

Alex, I think this concern is fair, and I have no intention of
forking the translation effort. The scope I have in mind is
deliberately narrow: keep zh_TW aligned with zh_CN in structure and
coverage, and localize only where terminology genuinely differs
(e.g. 軟體 vs 软件, 介面 vs 接口) -- exactly the kind of differences
you mentioned. Plain, accurate technical translation, no literary
rewriting.

Weijie, as a first concrete step I will prepare a terminology series
(rather than one-word-at-a-time patches, as you suggested) covering
the existing process/ documents, and use it to build a small glossary
that future patches and reviews can follow.

Jon, if this direction sounds acceptable, I am happy to send a
MAINTAINERS patch once the details are settled in this thread.

Thanks,
Chen-Yu

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Dongliang Mu]

On 7/13/26 10:44 AM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Hi Weijie,
>
>> I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
>> or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
>> the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
>> Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)
> Yes, exactly. For both v1 and v2 I ran get_maintainer.pl, which only
> lists Hu Haowen and the mailing lists for zh_TW files, so Alex and the
> zh_CN team were never on cc.
>
>> Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
>> patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
>> might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
>> Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
>> near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
>> new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.
> Before it comes to that: I would like to step up and help carry zh_TW
> forward. I am a native zh_TW speaker from Taiwan, and I understand
> this means staying with it, not a one-off effort.
>
> Dongliang, since you kindly offered to help review zh_TW patches:
> would you be open to doing this together -- either as co-maintainers,
> or with me listed as a reviewer (R:) first if that is a more
> reasonable starting point for a newcomer?

Chen-Yu,I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW. The 
script - tools/docs/checktransupdate.py can seamlessly work on zh_TW. 
This can help track the missing changes. But for the current situation 
of zh_TW, re-translation may be more efficient.

As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to 
Alex's kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are 
familar with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be 
better for you to learn maintainer workflow.

Dongliang Mu

>
>>> To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
>>> as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
>>> translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
>>> and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
>>> maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.
> Alex, I think this concern is fair, and I have no intention of
> forking the translation effort. The scope I have in mind is
> deliberately narrow: keep zh_TW aligned with zh_CN in structure and
> coverage, and localize only where terminology genuinely differs
> (e.g. 軟體 vs 软件, 介面 vs 接口) -- exactly the kind of differences
> you mentioned. Plain, accurate technical translation, no literary
> rewriting.
>
> Weijie, as a first concrete step I will prepare a terminology series
> (rather than one-word-at-a-time patches, as you suggested) covering
> the existing process/ documents, and use it to build a small glossary
> that future patches and reviews can follow.
You can send a zh_TW tree-wide patchset to change them.
>
> Jon, if this direction sounds acceptable, I am happy to send a
> MAINTAINERS patch once the details are settled in this thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Chen-Yu

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 10:44:12AM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Hi Weijie,
> 
> > I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
> > or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
> > the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
> > Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)
> 
> Yes, exactly. For both v1 and v2 I ran get_maintainer.pl, which only
> lists Hu Haowen and the mailing lists for zh_TW files, so Alex and the
> zh_CN team were never on cc.

Right, let's note this situation down. We'll deal with it after we come
up with the final solution.

> 
> > Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
> > patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
> > might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
> > Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
> > near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
> > new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.
> 
> Before it comes to that: I would like to step up and help carry zh_TW
> forward. I am a native zh_TW speaker from Taiwan, and I understand
> this means staying with it, not a one-off effort.

Nice and thanks. Frankly speaking, At the very beginning, I did consider
saying that I also wanted to take over, and I wished I could. However,
considering that I was certainly not familiar with the traditional
Chinese terms used in Taiwan (although I knew some, that was all), I
finally chose to be speak more conservatively.

> Dongliang, since you kindly offered to help review zh_TW patches:
> would you be open to doing this together -- either as co-maintainers,
> or with me listed as a reviewer (R:) first if that is a more
> reasonable starting point for a newcomer?

Since I was the one who shamelessly initiated this discussion, I
definitely have the obligation to do something. See below...

> > > To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
> > > as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
> > > translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
> > > and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
> > > maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.
> 
> Alex, I think this concern is fair, and I have no intention of
> forking the translation effort. The scope I have in mind is
> deliberately narrow: keep zh_TW aligned with zh_CN in structure and
> coverage, and localize only where terminology genuinely differs
> (e.g. 軟體 vs 软件, 介面 vs 接口) -- exactly the kind of differences
> you mentioned. Plain, accurate technical translation, no literary
> rewriting.

Exactly, before sending my first email here, I had already thought about
the following approach, what do you think?

  * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
    simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
    we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
    which seems like a good place to begin. (ok... seems exactly what you said ;-)

> Weijie, as a first concrete step I will prepare a terminology series
> (rather than one-word-at-a-time patches, as you suggested) covering
> the existing process/ documents, and use it to build a small glossary
> that future patches and reviews can follow.

I used to read this:

https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8

Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.

On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 11:49:07AM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> Chen-Yu,I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW. The
> script - tools/docs/checktransupdate.py can seamlessly work on zh_TW. This
> can help track the missing changes.

I would also like to take a job ;-) while my current contributions are
not sufficient. And wish soon.

> As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to Alex's
> kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are familar
> with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be better for you to
> learn maintainer workflow.

I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
two months (depends), and then make a formal change.

Before we make a formal change, I will monitor the list (CN & TW), If
there is any situation like this patch which is not sent correctly, I
will handle it promptly.

OK, I consider myself quite familiar with the development process and
the maintenance process, mainly from Git (seems more complicated).
Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
translation work. But this can be further discussed.

Thanks,
Weijie

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[葉宸佑]

Hi Dongliang, Weijie,

Thank you both -- this is more support than I expected, and I am glad
to do this together.

> Chen-Yu, I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW.
> [...]
> As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to
> Alex's kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are
> familar with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be
> better for you to learn maintainer workflow.

To be honest: no, I am not familiar with the maintainer workflow yet --
so far I have only been on the contributor side. So routing zh_TW
patches through Alex's tree first sounds like the right arrangement to
me, both for reliability and so that I can learn the workflow properly
before taking on more. Alex, if you are fine with this, thank you in
advance.

> I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
> two months (depends), and then make a formal change.

Agreed. A trial period before touching MAINTAINERS is fair -- it lets
the work speak first. I will send the MAINTAINERS patch when you both
feel the arrangement has proven itself.

>   * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
>     simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
>     we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
>     which seems like a good place to begin.

This matches what I had in mind, and it also answers Alex's concern:
zh_TW should track zh_CN in structure and coverage, and differ only in
terminology. I will start by running checktransupdate.py over zh_TW to
get a concrete inventory of what is stale and how far behind we are,
and share the result here so we can prioritize together.

> re-translation may be more efficient.

Agreed for the badly outdated files -- patching a two-year-old
translation line by line is likely more work than translating the
current text afresh. The inventory should tell us which files fall
into which category.

> https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
>
> Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
> reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.

As a native speaker: it is a reasonable general reference, but it is
not kernel-specific, and some entries are dated or not what people
actually write in Taiwan today. I would rather build the glossary
bottom-up from the terms that actually appear in the kernel docs
(軟體/軟件, 介面/接口, 記憶體, 行程, 核心, 佇列, ...), and use the
wikibooks table only as a cross-check. I will include the glossary as
part of the first terminology series so it can be reviewed like any
other patch.

> Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
> chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
> translation work.

That would help a lot, thank you. It also sounds like a natural split:
you on process and monitoring, me on the translation and the zh_TW
terminology judgement.

One last thing about the patch that started all this: rather than
keeping the v2 for 8.Conclusion pending, I would suggest dropping it
and folding its changes into the terminology series, so the fixes
land in one consistent batch. Any objection?

Thanks,
Chen-Yu

Weijie Yuan <wy@wyuan.org> 於 2026年7月13日週一 下午1:33寫道：
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 10:44:12AM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Hi Weijie,
> >
> > > I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
> > > or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
> > > the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
> > > Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)
> >
> > Yes, exactly. For both v1 and v2 I ran get_maintainer.pl, which only
> > lists Hu Haowen and the mailing lists for zh_TW files, so Alex and the
> > zh_CN team were never on cc.
>
> Right, let's note this situation down. We'll deal with it after we come
> up with the final solution.
>
> >
> > > Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
> > > patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
> > > might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
> > > Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
> > > near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
> > > new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.
> >
> > Before it comes to that: I would like to step up and help carry zh_TW
> > forward. I am a native zh_TW speaker from Taiwan, and I understand
> > this means staying with it, not a one-off effort.
>
> Nice and thanks. Frankly speaking, At the very beginning, I did consider
> saying that I also wanted to take over, and I wished I could. However,
> considering that I was certainly not familiar with the traditional
> Chinese terms used in Taiwan (although I knew some, that was all), I
> finally chose to be speak more conservatively.
>
> > Dongliang, since you kindly offered to help review zh_TW patches:
> > would you be open to doing this together -- either as co-maintainers,
> > or with me listed as a reviewer (R:) first if that is a more
> > reasonable starting point for a newcomer?
>
> Since I was the one who shamelessly initiated this discussion, I
> definitely have the obligation to do something. See below...
>
> > > > To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
> > > > as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
> > > > translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
> > > > and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
> > > > maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.
> >
> > Alex, I think this concern is fair, and I have no intention of
> > forking the translation effort. The scope I have in mind is
> > deliberately narrow: keep zh_TW aligned with zh_CN in structure and
> > coverage, and localize only where terminology genuinely differs
> > (e.g. 軟體 vs 软件, 介面 vs 接口) -- exactly the kind of differences
> > you mentioned. Plain, accurate technical translation, no literary
> > rewriting.
>
> Exactly, before sending my first email here, I had already thought about
> the following approach, what do you think?
>
>   * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
>     simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
>     we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
>     which seems like a good place to begin. (ok... seems exactly what you said ;-)
>
> > Weijie, as a first concrete step I will prepare a terminology series
> > (rather than one-word-at-a-time patches, as you suggested) covering
> > the existing process/ documents, and use it to build a small glossary
> > that future patches and reviews can follow.
>
> I used to read this:
>
> https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
>
> Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
> reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 11:49:07AM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> > Chen-Yu,I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW. The
> > script - tools/docs/checktransupdate.py can seamlessly work on zh_TW. This
> > can help track the missing changes.
>
> I would also like to take a job ;-) while my current contributions are
> not sufficient. And wish soon.
>
> > As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to Alex's
> > kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are familar
> > with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be better for you to
> > learn maintainer workflow.
>
> I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
> two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
>
> Before we make a formal change, I will monitor the list (CN & TW), If
> there is any situation like this patch which is not sent correctly, I
> will handle it promptly.
>
> OK, I consider myself quite familiar with the development process and
> the maintenance process, mainly from Git (seems more complicated).
> Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
> chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
> translation work. But this can be further discussed.
>
> Thanks,
> Weijie

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[葉宸佑]

Here is the inventory I promised, from checktransupdate.py on mainline:

  zh_TW:  51 translated files, all out of date
          221 distinct English commits to catch up with

    process/      14 files
    admin-guide/  15
    arch/         12
    dev-tools/     5
    filesystems/   3
    cpu-freq/      1
    index.rst      1

For calibration I ran the same tool on zh_CN: 178 translated files,
also all out of date, 639 distinct commits behind. So in terms of
drift from the English originals, zh_TW is not in a categorically
different state from zh_CN -- the real gap is coverage (51 vs 178
files), not decay. That makes me more optimistic than the "two years
of stagnation" framing suggests: many zh_TW files are only behind by
a typo fix or two.

(The ~3300 documents with no Chinese translation at all are out of
scope for both locales, so I do not think that is the problem to
solve first.)

One thing I noticed while reading the script: checktransupdate.py
tracks the base commit accurately only when the translation commit
message contains "update to commit HASH" (or "Update the translation
through commit HASH"); otherwise it falls back to guessing from author
dates. Adopting that convention for zh_TW commits from now on would
make the tool's numbers reliable, and it costs nothing. Perhaps that
could be part of the "more reasonable workflow" Weijie mentioned.

My suggestion for the first step is process/ (14 files): it is where
new contributors land first, it is small enough to finish as one
series, and it is where the terminology differences are most visible.
I would fold the pending 8.Conclusion patch into that series and build
the glossary from it.

葉宸佑 <chenyou910331@gmail.com> 於 2026年7月13日週一 下午2:35寫道：
>
> Hi Dongliang, Weijie,
>
> Thank you both -- this is more support than I expected, and I am glad
> to do this together.
>
> > Chen-Yu, I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW.
> > [...]
> > As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to
> > Alex's kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are
> > familar with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be
> > better for you to learn maintainer workflow.
>
> To be honest: no, I am not familiar with the maintainer workflow yet --
> so far I have only been on the contributor side. So routing zh_TW
> patches through Alex's tree first sounds like the right arrangement to
> me, both for reliability and so that I can learn the workflow properly
> before taking on more. Alex, if you are fine with this, thank you in
> advance.
>
> > I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
> > two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
>
> Agreed. A trial period before touching MAINTAINERS is fair -- it lets
> the work speak first. I will send the MAINTAINERS patch when you both
> feel the arrangement has proven itself.
>
> >   * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
> >     simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
> >     we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
> >     which seems like a good place to begin.
>
> This matches what I had in mind, and it also answers Alex's concern:
> zh_TW should track zh_CN in structure and coverage, and differ only in
> terminology. I will start by running checktransupdate.py over zh_TW to
> get a concrete inventory of what is stale and how far behind we are,
> and share the result here so we can prioritize together.
>
> > re-translation may be more efficient.
>
> Agreed for the badly outdated files -- patching a two-year-old
> translation line by line is likely more work than translating the
> current text afresh. The inventory should tell us which files fall
> into which category.
>
> > https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
> >
> > Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
> > reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
>
> As a native speaker: it is a reasonable general reference, but it is
> not kernel-specific, and some entries are dated or not what people
> actually write in Taiwan today. I would rather build the glossary
> bottom-up from the terms that actually appear in the kernel docs
> (軟體/軟件, 介面/接口, 記憶體, 行程, 核心, 佇列, ...), and use the
> wikibooks table only as a cross-check. I will include the glossary as
> part of the first terminology series so it can be reviewed like any
> other patch.
>
> > Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
> > chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
> > translation work.
>
> That would help a lot, thank you. It also sounds like a natural split:
> you on process and monitoring, me on the translation and the zh_TW
> terminology judgement.
>
> One last thing about the patch that started all this: rather than
> keeping the v2 for 8.Conclusion pending, I would suggest dropping it
> and folding its changes into the terminology series, so the fixes
> land in one consistent batch. Any objection?
>
> Thanks,
> Chen-Yu
>
> Weijie Yuan <wy@wyuan.org> 於 2026年7月13日週一 下午1:33寫道：
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 10:44:12AM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > > Hi Weijie,
> > >
> > > > I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
> > > > or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
> > > > the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
> > > > Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)
> > >
> > > Yes, exactly. For both v1 and v2 I ran get_maintainer.pl, which only
> > > lists Hu Haowen and the mailing lists for zh_TW files, so Alex and the
> > > zh_CN team were never on cc.
> >
> > Right, let's note this situation down. We'll deal with it after we come
> > up with the final solution.
> >
> > >
> > > > Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
> > > > patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
> > > > might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
> > > > Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
> > > > near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
> > > > new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.
> > >
> > > Before it comes to that: I would like to step up and help carry zh_TW
> > > forward. I am a native zh_TW speaker from Taiwan, and I understand
> > > this means staying with it, not a one-off effort.
> >
> > Nice and thanks. Frankly speaking, At the very beginning, I did consider
> > saying that I also wanted to take over, and I wished I could. However,
> > considering that I was certainly not familiar with the traditional
> > Chinese terms used in Taiwan (although I knew some, that was all), I
> > finally chose to be speak more conservatively.
> >
> > > Dongliang, since you kindly offered to help review zh_TW patches:
> > > would you be open to doing this together -- either as co-maintainers,
> > > or with me listed as a reviewer (R:) first if that is a more
> > > reasonable starting point for a newcomer?
> >
> > Since I was the one who shamelessly initiated this discussion, I
> > definitely have the obligation to do something. See below...
> >
> > > > > To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
> > > > > as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
> > > > > translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
> > > > > and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
> > > > > maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.
> > >
> > > Alex, I think this concern is fair, and I have no intention of
> > > forking the translation effort. The scope I have in mind is
> > > deliberately narrow: keep zh_TW aligned with zh_CN in structure and
> > > coverage, and localize only where terminology genuinely differs
> > > (e.g. 軟體 vs 软件, 介面 vs 接口) -- exactly the kind of differences
> > > you mentioned. Plain, accurate technical translation, no literary
> > > rewriting.
> >
> > Exactly, before sending my first email here, I had already thought about
> > the following approach, what do you think?
> >
> >   * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
> >     simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
> >     we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
> >     which seems like a good place to begin. (ok... seems exactly what you said ;-)
> >
> > > Weijie, as a first concrete step I will prepare a terminology series
> > > (rather than one-word-at-a-time patches, as you suggested) covering
> > > the existing process/ documents, and use it to build a small glossary
> > > that future patches and reviews can follow.
> >
> > I used to read this:
> >
> > https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
> >
> > Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
> > reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 11:49:07AM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> > > Chen-Yu,I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW. The
> > > script - tools/docs/checktransupdate.py can seamlessly work on zh_TW. This
> > > can help track the missing changes.
> >
> > I would also like to take a job ;-) while my current contributions are
> > not sufficient. And wish soon.
> >
> > > As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to Alex's
> > > kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are familar
> > > with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be better for you to
> > > learn maintainer workflow.
> >
> > I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
> > two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
> >
> > Before we make a formal change, I will monitor the list (CN & TW), If
> > there is any situation like this patch which is not sent correctly, I
> > will handle it promptly.
> >
> > OK, I consider myself quite familiar with the development process and
> > the maintenance process, mainly from Git (seems more complicated).
> > Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
> > chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
> > translation work. But this can be further discussed.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Weijie

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Dongliang Mu]

On 7/13/26 5:03 PM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Here is the inventory I promised, from checktransupdate.py on mainline:
>
>    zh_TW:  51 translated files, all out of date
>            221 distinct English commits to catch up with
>
>      process/      14 files
>      admin-guide/  15
>      arch/         12
>      dev-tools/     5
>      filesystems/   3
>      cpu-freq/      1
>      index.rst      1
>
> For calibration I ran the same tool on zh_CN: 178 translated files,
> also all out of date, 639 distinct commits behind. So in terms of

For many files, the missing commits might not be needed as they might 
not affect the translation (such as typos in English).

Because this new commit style is developed recently by Yanteng and me, 
many translated documenation does not tranform to the corresponding styles.

> drift from the English originals, zh_TW is not in a categorically
> different state from zh_CN -- the real gap is coverage (51 vs 178
> files), not decay. That makes me more optimistic than the "two years
> of stagnation" framing suggests: many zh_TW files are only behind by
> a typo fix or two.
>
> (The ~3300 documents with no Chinese translation at all are out of
> scope for both locales, so I do not think that is the problem to
> solve first.)
Yes, we need more volunteers to translate English documents. However, 
translation is not attractive in the LLM era. :(
>
> One thing I noticed while reading the script: checktransupdate.py
> tracks the base commit accurately only when the translation commit
> message contains "update to commit HASH" (or "Update the translation
> through commit HASH"); otherwise it falls back to guessing from author
> dates. Adopting that convention for zh_TW commits from now on would
> make the tool's numbers reliable, and it costs nothing. Perhaps that
> could be part of the "more reasonable workflow" Weijie mentioned.


Yes, if zh_TW can apply this convention the workflow would be more 
reasonable.


>
> My suggestion for the first step is process/ (14 files): it is where
> new contributors land first, it is small enough to finish as one
> series, and it is where the terminology differences are most visible.
> I would fold the pending 8.Conclusion patch into that series and build
> the glossary from it.


For the todo list, you can check Jon's advice for new languages, e.g., 
Spanish. Search it from LKML

Dongliang Mu


>
> 葉宸佑 <chenyou910331@gmail.com> 於 2026年7月13日週一 下午2:35寫道：
>> Hi Dongliang, Weijie,
>>
>> Thank you both -- this is more support than I expected, and I am glad
>> to do this together.
>>
>>> Chen-Yu, I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW.
>>> [...]
>>> As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to
>>> Alex's kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are
>>> familar with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be
>>> better for you to learn maintainer workflow.
>> To be honest: no, I am not familiar with the maintainer workflow yet --
>> so far I have only been on the contributor side. So routing zh_TW
>> patches through Alex's tree first sounds like the right arrangement to
>> me, both for reliability and so that I can learn the workflow properly
>> before taking on more. Alex, if you are fine with this, thank you in
>> advance.
>>
>>> I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
>>> two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
>> Agreed. A trial period before touching MAINTAINERS is fair -- it lets
>> the work speak first. I will send the MAINTAINERS patch when you both
>> feel the arrangement has proven itself.
>>
>>>    * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
>>>      simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
>>>      we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
>>>      which seems like a good place to begin.
>> This matches what I had in mind, and it also answers Alex's concern:
>> zh_TW should track zh_CN in structure and coverage, and differ only in
>> terminology. I will start by running checktransupdate.py over zh_TW to
>> get a concrete inventory of what is stale and how far behind we are,
>> and share the result here so we can prioritize together.
>>
>>> re-translation may be more efficient.
>> Agreed for the badly outdated files -- patching a two-year-old
>> translation line by line is likely more work than translating the
>> current text afresh. The inventory should tell us which files fall
>> into which category.
>>
>>> https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
>>>
>>> Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
>>> reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
>> As a native speaker: it is a reasonable general reference, but it is
>> not kernel-specific, and some entries are dated or not what people
>> actually write in Taiwan today. I would rather build the glossary
>> bottom-up from the terms that actually appear in the kernel docs
>> (軟體/軟件, 介面/接口, 記憶體, 行程, 核心, 佇列, ...), and use the
>> wikibooks table only as a cross-check. I will include the glossary as
>> part of the first terminology series so it can be reviewed like any
>> other patch.
>>
>>> Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
>>> chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
>>> translation work.
>> That would help a lot, thank you. It also sounds like a natural split:
>> you on process and monitoring, me on the translation and the zh_TW
>> terminology judgement.
>>
>> One last thing about the patch that started all this: rather than
>> keeping the v2 for 8.Conclusion pending, I would suggest dropping it
>> and folding its changes into the terminology series, so the fixes
>> land in one consistent batch. Any objection?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chen-Yu
>>
>> Weijie Yuan <wy@wyuan.org> 於 2026年7月13日週一 下午1:33寫道：
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 10:44:12AM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
>>>> Hi Weijie,
>>>>
>>>>> I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
>>>>> or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
>>>>> the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
>>>>> Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)
>>>> Yes, exactly. For both v1 and v2 I ran get_maintainer.pl, which only
>>>> lists Hu Haowen and the mailing lists for zh_TW files, so Alex and the
>>>> zh_CN team were never on cc.
>>> Right, let's note this situation down. We'll deal with it after we come
>>> up with the final solution.
>>>
>>>>> Given that this document has not been maintained for ~2 years and these
>>>>> patches to the terminology actually don't have much significance, it
>>>>> might be more appropriate to directly declare the status of Traditional
>>>>> Chinese as "Orphan" provisionally for now, and remove it directly in the
>>>>> near future, until Hao Wen's return and opinion. Or maybe, waiting for a
>>>>> new good soul to take over, which is unpredictable.
>>>> Before it comes to that: I would like to step up and help carry zh_TW
>>>> forward. I am a native zh_TW speaker from Taiwan, and I understand
>>>> this means staying with it, not a one-off effort.
>>> Nice and thanks. Frankly speaking, At the very beginning, I did consider
>>> saying that I also wanted to take over, and I wished I could. However,
>>> considering that I was certainly not familiar with the traditional
>>> Chinese terms used in Taiwan (although I knew some, that was all), I
>>> finally chose to be speak more conservatively.
>>>
>>>> Dongliang, since you kindly offered to help review zh_TW patches:
>>>> would you be open to doing this together -- either as co-maintainers,
>>>> or with me listed as a reviewer (R:) first if that is a more
>>>> reasonable starting point for a newcomer?
>>> Since I was the one who shamelessly initiated this discussion, I
>>> definitely have the obligation to do something. See below...
>>>
>>>>>> To avoid scattering our efforts, I suggest we minimize fragmentation
>>>>>> as much as possible. When it comes to technical documentation
>>>>>> translation, not literary translation, a straightforward, unadorned,
>>>>>> and free from misunderstandings is the best translation and easy to
>>>>>> maintain. Let's keep thing simple, unless sth is really necessary.
>>>> Alex, I think this concern is fair, and I have no intention of
>>>> forking the translation effort. The scope I have in mind is
>>>> deliberately narrow: keep zh_TW aligned with zh_CN in structure and
>>>> coverage, and localize only where terminology genuinely differs
>>>> (e.g. 軟體 vs 软件, 介面 vs 接口) -- exactly the kind of differences
>>>> you mentioned. Plain, accurate technical translation, no literary
>>>> rewriting.
>>> Exactly, before sending my first email here, I had already thought about
>>> the following approach, what do you think?
>>>
>>>    * Considering that English documents are changing so rapidly, and even
>>>      simplified Chinese cannot keep up with them immediately. I suggest
>>>      we start working on catching up with simplified Chinese right now,
>>>      which seems like a good place to begin. (ok... seems exactly what you said ;-)
>>>
>>>> Weijie, as a first concrete step I will prepare a terminology series
>>>> (rather than one-word-at-a-time patches, as you suggested) covering
>>>> the existing process/ documents, and use it to build a small glossary
>>>> that future patches and reviews can follow.
>>> I used to read this:
>>>
>>> https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
>>>
>>> Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
>>> reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 11:49:07AM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
>>>> Chen-Yu,I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW. The
>>>> script - tools/docs/checktransupdate.py can seamlessly work on zh_TW. This
>>>> can help track the missing changes.
>>> I would also like to take a job ;-) while my current contributions are
>>> not sufficient. And wish soon.
>>>
>>>> As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to Alex's
>>>> kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are familar
>>>> with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be better for you to
>>>> learn maintainer workflow.
>>> I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
>>> two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
>>>
>>> Before we make a formal change, I will monitor the list (CN & TW), If
>>> there is any situation like this patch which is not sent correctly, I
>>> will handle it promptly.
>>>
>>> OK, I consider myself quite familiar with the development process and
>>> the maintenance process, mainly from Git (seems more complicated).
>>> Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
>>> chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
>>> translation work. But this can be further discussed.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Weijie

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 02:35:22PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Hi Dongliang, Weijie,
> 
> Thank you both -- this is more support than I expected, and I am glad
> to do this together.
> 
> > Chen-Yu, I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW.
> > [...]
> > As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to
> > Alex's kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are
> > familar with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be
> > better for you to learn maintainer workflow.
> 
> To be honest: no, I am not familiar with the maintainer workflow yet --
> so far I have only been on the contributor side. So routing zh_TW
> patches through Alex's tree first sounds like the right arrangement to
> me, both for reliability and so that I can learn the workflow properly
> before taking on more. Alex, if you are fine with this, thank you in
> advance.
> 
> > I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
> > two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
> 
> Agreed. A trial period before touching MAINTAINERS is fair -- it lets
> the work speak first. I will send the MAINTAINERS patch when you both
> feel the arrangement has proven itself.

Yeah, of course, this is not questioning your abilities at all. Winning
the trust of the community step by step in a gradual manner is
definitely better. This is something I have once again realized while
going through the lore archives of how the Git localization was done. By
reading their historical exchanges (between Junio C Hamano and Jiang
Xin), we might be able to obtain some practical experience and
precautions regarding the process. But this is not something that needs
to be considered at present.

> > https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
> >
> > Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
> > reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
> 
> As a native speaker: it is a reasonable general reference, but it is
> not kernel-specific, and some entries are dated or not what people
> actually write in Taiwan today. I would rather build the glossary
> bottom-up from the terms that actually appear in the kernel docs
> (軟體/軟件, 介面/接口, 記憶體, 行程, 核心, 佇列, ...), and use the
> wikibooks table only as a cross-check.

Ah got it, so this is why we need a local to guard a pass ;-)

> I will include the glossary as part of the first terminology series so
> it can be reviewed like any other patch.

Very much appreciated.

> > Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
> > chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
> > translation work.
> 
> That would help a lot, thank you. It also sounds like a natural split:
> you on process and monitoring, me on the translation and the zh_TW
> terminology judgement.
> 
> One last thing about the patch that started all this: rather than
> keeping the v2 for 8.Conclusion pending, I would suggest dropping it
> and folding its changes into the terminology series, so the fixes
> land in one consistent batch. Any objection?

I definitely agree. Batching them would be easier to review and
retrospect, and it's better to track on the list.


On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 05:03:12PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Here is the inventory I promised, from checktransupdate.py on mainline:
> 
>   zh_TW:  51 translated files, all out of date
>           221 distinct English commits to catch up with
> 
>     process/      14 files
>     admin-guide/  15
>     arch/         12
>     dev-tools/     5
>     filesystems/   3
>     cpu-freq/      1
>     index.rst      1
> 
> For calibration I ran the same tool on zh_CN: 178 translated files,
> also all out of date, 639 distinct commits behind. So in terms of
> drift from the English originals, zh_TW is not in a categorically
> different state from zh_CN -- the real gap is coverage (51 vs 178
> files), not decay.

> That makes me more optimistic than the "two years of stagnation"
> framing suggests: many zh_TW files are only behind by a typo fix or
> two.

Then I'm exaggerating, oops.

> (The ~3300 documents with no Chinese translation at all are out of
> scope for both locales, so I do not think that is the problem to
> solve first.)

Yes, and I suspect that some of the documents might not actually need to
be translated? I will conduct some more investigations.

> One thing I noticed while reading the script: checktransupdate.py
> tracks the base commit accurately only when the translation commit
> message contains "update to commit HASH" (or "Update the translation
> through commit HASH"); otherwise it falls back to guessing from author
> dates. Adopting that convention for zh_TW commits from now on would
> make the tool's numbers reliable, and it costs nothing. Perhaps that
> could be part of the "more reasonable workflow" Weijie mentioned.

Yes, and that's documented in here,

https://docs.kernel.org/translations/zh_CN/how-to.html

so later zh_TW could consider making one.

> My suggestion for the first step is process/ (14 files): it is where
> new contributors land first, it is small enough to finish as one
> series, and it is where the terminology differences are most visible.
> I would fold the pending 8.Conclusion patch into that series and build
> the glossary from it.

Agreed. The significance of the initial stage for newcomers is
self-evident. Of course, the English documents have undoubtedly been
constantly revised over time. So for these two Chinese documents, this
part is of crucial importance. After all, this is where almost everyone
begins to read, including me. So when I found that there was a Chinese
translation here, I was very happy ;-)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 05:41:31PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> 
> On 7/13/26 5:03 PM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Here is the inventory I promised, from checktransupdate.py on mainline:
> > 
> >    zh_TW:  51 translated files, all out of date
> >            221 distinct English commits to catch up with
> > 
> >      process/      14 files
> >      admin-guide/  15
> >      arch/         12
> >      dev-tools/     5
> >      filesystems/   3
> >      cpu-freq/      1
> >      index.rst      1
> > 
> > For calibration I ran the same tool on zh_CN: 178 translated files,
> > also all out of date, 639 distinct commits behind. So in terms of
> 
> For many files, the missing commits might not be needed as they might not
> affect the translation (such as typos in English).
> 
> Because this new commit style is developed recently by Yanteng and me, many
> translated documenation does not tranform to the corresponding styles.
> 
> > drift from the English originals, zh_TW is not in a categorically
> > different state from zh_CN -- the real gap is coverage (51 vs 178
> > files), not decay. That makes me more optimistic than the "two years
> > of stagnation" framing suggests: many zh_TW files are only behind by
> > a typo fix or two.
> > 
> > (The ~3300 documents with no Chinese translation at all are out of
> > scope for both locales, so I do not think that is the problem to
> > solve first.)
>
> Yes, we need more volunteers to translate English documents. However,
> translation is not attractive in the LLM era. :(

OK, the AI thing has still inevitably come up ;-)

I can spend an entire afternoon reading the discussion emails and
articles about AI/LLM in the community ;-)

  Sidenote:
  I noticed that there seems to be renewed discussion in the English
  document section about removing the "assisted-by" trailer. It would be
  a good idea to make a note of this and see if we need to update any
  relevant sections.

However, personally speaking, I still prefer to read the official
website's documents. It was written by the developers, and of course it
is more authoritative than the content produced by AI/LLM. And sometimes
the information provided by the AI/LLM is a bit behind the information
on the official website kernel.org.

> For the todo list, you can check Jon's advice for new languages, e.g.,
> Spanish. Search it from LKML

Thanks, I'll learn about it too.

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[葉宸佑]

Hi Dongliang, Weijie,

> For many files, the missing commits might not be needed as they might
> not affect the translation (such as typos in English).

Right -- which means the real workload is smaller than the raw numbers
suggest. For files where the pending commits turn out to be
English-only fixes, the update can be a trivial baseline bump
(an "update to commit HASH" commit with little or no content change),
so the tool's numbers stay meaningful without inventing work.

> Because this new commit style is developed recently by Yanteng and me,
> many translated documenation does not tranform to the corresponding styles.

Good to know the convention is recent -- zh_TW can simply adopt it
from the first series onward.

> For the todo list, you can check Jon's advice for new languages, e.g.,
> Spanish. Search it from LKML

Will do, thanks for the pointer.

> Yes, and that's documented in here,
>
> https://docs.kernel.org/translations/zh_CN/how-to.html
>
> so later zh_TW could consider making one.

Weijie: agreed, a zh_TW how-to (mirroring the zh_CN one, with the
glossary referenced) looks like the natural follow-up once the first
series settles the terminology. Adding it to the list.

So, to keep everything in one place, my understanding of the plan:

- Chen-Yu: terminology series for process/ (14 files), folding in the
  pending 8.Conclusion changes, glossary included; adopt the
  "update to commit HASH" convention from now on
- Chen-Yu: read Jon's advice for new-language efforts (Spanish thread)
- later: a zh_TW how-to document
- Weijie: investigate which documents may not need translation;
  monitor the CN/TW lists during the trial period
- Dongliang: review; patches routed through Alex's tree (pending
  Alex's confirmation)

If I got anything wrong, please correct me -- otherwise I will get
started on the series.

Thanks,
Chen-Yu

Weijie Yuan <wy@wyuan.org> 於 2026年7月13日週一 下午6:23寫道：
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 02:35:22PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Hi Dongliang, Weijie,
> >
> > Thank you both -- this is more support than I expected, and I am glad
> > to do this together.
> >
> > > Chen-Yu, I would like to serve as co-maintainers to help maintain zh_TW.
> > > [...]
> > > As discussed with Alex before, maybe zh_TW patches can first go to
> > > Alex's kernel tree and then push to Jon's tree. I am not sure if you are
> > > familar with the maintainer workflow. If not, this solution may be
> > > better for you to learn maintainer workflow.
> >
> > To be honest: no, I am not familiar with the maintainer workflow yet --
> > so far I have only been on the contributor side. So routing zh_TW
> > patches through Alex's tree first sounds like the right arrangement to
> > me, both for reliability and so that I can learn the workflow properly
> > before taking on more. Alex, if you are fine with this, thank you in
> > advance.
> >
> > > I suggest that we could try out the provisional plan for about one or
> > > two months (depends), and then make a formal change.
> >
> > Agreed. A trial period before touching MAINTAINERS is fair -- it lets
> > the work speak first. I will send the MAINTAINERS patch when you both
> > feel the arrangement has proven itself.
>
> Yeah, of course, this is not questioning your abilities at all. Winning
> the trust of the community step by step in a gradual manner is
> definitely better. This is something I have once again realized while
> going through the lore archives of how the Git localization was done. By
> reading their historical exchanges (between Junio C Hamano and Jiang
> Xin), we might be able to obtain some practical experience and
> precautions regarding the process. But this is not something that needs
> to be considered at present.
>
> > > https://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%86%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AE%A1%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%BA%E6%9C%AF%E8%AF%AD%E5%AF%B9%E7%85%A7%E8%A1%A8
> > >
> > > Is it comprehensive? I don't know. Perhaps we could add some specific
> > > reference tables related to the Linux Kernel on top of it.
> >
> > As a native speaker: it is a reasonable general reference, but it is
> > not kernel-specific, and some entries are dated or not what people
> > actually write in Taiwan today. I would rather build the glossary
> > bottom-up from the terms that actually appear in the kernel docs
> > (軟體/軟件, 介面/接口, 記憶體, 行程, 核心, 佇列, ...), and use the
> > wikibooks table only as a cross-check.
>
> Ah got it, so this is why we need a local to guard a pass ;-)
>
> > I will include the glossary as part of the first terminology series so
> > it can be reviewed like any other patch.
>
> Very much appreciated.
>
> > > Perhaps I can handle most of the operation and maintenance tasks of
> > > chore, giving Chen-yu more time and concentration to focus on the actual
> > > translation work.
> >
> > That would help a lot, thank you. It also sounds like a natural split:
> > you on process and monitoring, me on the translation and the zh_TW
> > terminology judgement.
> >
> > One last thing about the patch that started all this: rather than
> > keeping the v2 for 8.Conclusion pending, I would suggest dropping it
> > and folding its changes into the terminology series, so the fixes
> > land in one consistent batch. Any objection?
>
> I definitely agree. Batching them would be easier to review and
> retrospect, and it's better to track on the list.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 05:03:12PM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Here is the inventory I promised, from checktransupdate.py on mainline:
> >
> >   zh_TW:  51 translated files, all out of date
> >           221 distinct English commits to catch up with
> >
> >     process/      14 files
> >     admin-guide/  15
> >     arch/         12
> >     dev-tools/     5
> >     filesystems/   3
> >     cpu-freq/      1
> >     index.rst      1
> >
> > For calibration I ran the same tool on zh_CN: 178 translated files,
> > also all out of date, 639 distinct commits behind. So in terms of
> > drift from the English originals, zh_TW is not in a categorically
> > different state from zh_CN -- the real gap is coverage (51 vs 178
> > files), not decay.
>
> > That makes me more optimistic than the "two years of stagnation"
> > framing suggests: many zh_TW files are only behind by a typo fix or
> > two.
>
> Then I'm exaggerating, oops.
>
> > (The ~3300 documents with no Chinese translation at all are out of
> > scope for both locales, so I do not think that is the problem to
> > solve first.)
>
> Yes, and I suspect that some of the documents might not actually need to
> be translated? I will conduct some more investigations.
>
> > One thing I noticed while reading the script: checktransupdate.py
> > tracks the base commit accurately only when the translation commit
> > message contains "update to commit HASH" (or "Update the translation
> > through commit HASH"); otherwise it falls back to guessing from author
> > dates. Adopting that convention for zh_TW commits from now on would
> > make the tool's numbers reliable, and it costs nothing. Perhaps that
> > could be part of the "more reasonable workflow" Weijie mentioned.
>
> Yes, and that's documented in here,
>
> https://docs.kernel.org/translations/zh_CN/how-to.html
>
> so later zh_TW could consider making one.
>
> > My suggestion for the first step is process/ (14 files): it is where
> > new contributors land first, it is small enough to finish as one
> > series, and it is where the terminology differences are most visible.
> > I would fold the pending 8.Conclusion patch into that series and build
> > the glossary from it.
>
> Agreed. The significance of the initial stage for newcomers is
> self-evident. Of course, the English documents have undoubtedly been
> constantly revised over time. So for these two Chinese documents, this
> part is of crucial importance. After all, this is where almost everyone
> begins to read, including me. So when I found that there was a Chinese
> translation here, I was very happy ;-)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 05:41:31PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> >
> > On 7/13/26 5:03 PM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > > Here is the inventory I promised, from checktransupdate.py on mainline:
> > >
> > >    zh_TW:  51 translated files, all out of date
> > >            221 distinct English commits to catch up with
> > >
> > >      process/      14 files
> > >      admin-guide/  15
> > >      arch/         12
> > >      dev-tools/     5
> > >      filesystems/   3
> > >      cpu-freq/      1
> > >      index.rst      1
> > >
> > > For calibration I ran the same tool on zh_CN: 178 translated files,
> > > also all out of date, 639 distinct commits behind. So in terms of
> >
> > For many files, the missing commits might not be needed as they might not
> > affect the translation (such as typos in English).
> >
> > Because this new commit style is developed recently by Yanteng and me, many
> > translated documenation does not tranform to the corresponding styles.
> >
> > > drift from the English originals, zh_TW is not in a categorically
> > > different state from zh_CN -- the real gap is coverage (51 vs 178
> > > files), not decay. That makes me more optimistic than the "two years
> > > of stagnation" framing suggests: many zh_TW files are only behind by
> > > a typo fix or two.
> > >
> > > (The ~3300 documents with no Chinese translation at all are out of
> > > scope for both locales, so I do not think that is the problem to
> > > solve first.)
> >
> > Yes, we need more volunteers to translate English documents. However,
> > translation is not attractive in the LLM era. :(
>
> OK, the AI thing has still inevitably come up ;-)
>
> I can spend an entire afternoon reading the discussion emails and
> articles about AI/LLM in the community ;-)
>
>   Sidenote:
>   I noticed that there seems to be renewed discussion in the English
>   document section about removing the "assisted-by" trailer. It would be
>   a good idea to make a note of this and see if we need to update any
>   relevant sections.
>
> However, personally speaking, I still prefer to read the official
> website's documents. It was written by the developers, and of course it
> is more authoritative than the content produced by AI/LLM. And sometimes
> the information provided by the AI/LLM is a bit behind the information
> on the official website kernel.org.
>
> > For the todo list, you can check Jon's advice for new languages, e.g.,
> > Spanish. Search it from LKML
>
> Thanks, I'll learn about it too.

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Dongliang Mu]

On 7/10/26 4:49 PM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> Gentle ping.
>
> This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
> Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
> I might have missed?

It seems like Alex is not on the cc list. None can pick up this patch.

Add Alex into this thread.

Dongliang Mu

>
> Thanks,
> Chen-Yu
>
> Chen-Yu Yeh <chenyou910331@gmail.com> 於 2026年6月3日週三 下午4:26寫道：
>> Translate PRC tech terms into Taiwanese tech terms (e.g.,
>> 內核 -> 核心, 代碼 -> 程式碼, 軟件 -> 軟體) to improve
>> readability for local developers. Also, rephrase several
>> awkward sentences to make the document more fluent.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <dzm91@hust.edu.cn>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Yeh <chenyou910331@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Update Signed-off-by to use full real name.
>> - Add Reviewed-by tag from Dongliang Mu.
>>
>>   .../zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst            | 45 +++++++++----------
>>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst b/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
>> index d1634421b62c..823969cf793d 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/translations/zh_TW/process/8.Conclusion.rst
>> @@ -14,42 +14,41 @@
>>
>>   .. _tw_development_conclusion:
>>
>> -更多信息
>> +更多資訊
>>   ========
>>
>> -關於Linux內核開發和相關主題的信息來源很多。首先是在內核源代碼分發中找到的
>> -文檔目錄。頂級
>> +關於Linux核心開發和相關主題的資訊來源很多。首先是在核心原始碼分發中找到的
>> +文件目錄。頂級
>>   :ref:`Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/howto.rst <tw_process_howto>`
>>   文件是一個重要的起點；
>>   :ref:`Documentation/translations/zh_CN/process/submitting-patches.rst <tw_submittingpatches>`
>> -也是所有內核開發人員都應該閱讀的內容。許多內部內核API都是使用kerneldoc機制
>> -記錄的；“make htmldocs”或“make pdfdocs”可用於以HTML或PDF格式生成這些文檔
>> -（儘管某些發行版提供的tex版本會遇到內部限制，無法正確處理文檔）。
>> -
>> -不同的網站在各個細節層次上討論內核開發。本文作者想謙虛地建議用 https://lwn.net/
>> -作爲來源；有關許多特定內核主題的信息可以通過以下網址的 LWN 內核索引找到：
>> +也是所有核心開發人員都應該閱讀的內容。許多內部核心API都是使用kerneldoc機制
>> +記錄的；“make htmldocs”或“make pdfdocs”可用於以HTML或PDF格式生成這些文件
>> +（儘管某些發行版提供的tex版本會遇到內部限制，無法正確處理文件）。
>>
>> +不同的網站在各個細節層次上討論核心開發。本文作者想謙虛地建議用 https://lwn.net/
>> +作爲來源；有關許多特定核心主題的資訊可以通過以下網址的 LWN 核心索引找到:
>>     http://lwn.net/kernel/index/
>>
>> -除此之外，內核開發人員的一個寶貴資源是：
>> +除此之外，核心開發人員的一個寶貴資源是：
>>
>>     https://kernelnewbies.org/
>>
>> -當然，也不應該忘記 https://kernel.org/ ，這是內核發佈信息的最終位置。
>> +當然，也不應該忘記 https://kernel.org/ ，這是核心發佈資訊的最終位置。
>>
>> -關於內核開發有很多書：
>> +關於核心開發有很多書：
>>
>>     《Linux設備驅動程序》第三版（Jonathan Corbet、Alessandro Rubini和Greg Kroah Hartman）
>>     線上版本在 http://lwn.net/kernel/ldd3/
>>
>> -  《Linux內核設計與實現》（Robert Love）
>> +  《Linux核心設計與實現》（Robert Love）
>>
>> -  《深入理解Linux內核》(Daniel Bovet和Marco Cesati）
>> +  《深入理解Linux核心》(Daniel Bovet和Marco Cesati）
>>
>>   然而，所有這些書都有一個共同的缺點：它們上架時就往往有些過時，而且已經上架
>> -一段時間了。不過，在那裏還是可以找到相當多的好信息。
>> +一段時間了。不過，在那裏還是可以找到相當多的好資訊。
>>
>> -有關git的文檔，請訪問：
>> +有關git的文件，請訪問：
>>
>>     https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/
>>
>> @@ -58,16 +57,16 @@
>>   結論
>>   ====
>>
>> -祝賀所有通過這篇冗長的文檔的人。希望它能夠幫助您理解Linux內核是如何開發的，
>> +祝賀所有通過這篇冗長的文件的人。希望它能夠幫助您理解Linux核心是如何開發的，
>>   以及您如何參與這個過程。
>>
>> -最後，重要的是參與。任何開源軟件項目都不會超過其貢獻者投入其中的總和。Linux
>> -內核的發展速度和以前一樣快，因爲它得到了大量開發人員的幫助，他們都在努力使它
>> -變得更好。內核是一個最成功的例子，說明了當成千上萬的人爲了一個共同的目標一起
>> +最後，重要的是參與。任何開源軟體專案都不會超過其貢獻者投入其中的總和。Linux
>> +核心的發展速度和以前一樣快，因爲它得到了大量開發人員的幫助，他們都在努力使它
>> +變得更好。核心是一個最成功的例子，說明了當成千上萬的人爲了一個共同的目標一起
>>   工作時，可以做出什麼。
>>
>> -不過，內核總是可以從更大的開發人員基礎中獲益。總有更多的工作要做。但是同樣
>> -重要的是，Linux生態系統中的大多數其他參與者可以通過爲內核做出貢獻而受益。使
>> -代碼進入主線是提高代碼質量、降低維護和分發成本、提高對內核開發方向的影響程度
>> +不過，核心總是可以從更大的開發人員基礎中獲益。總有更多的工作要做。但是同樣
>> +重要的是，Linux生態系統中的大多數其他參與者可以通過爲核心做出貢獻而受益。使
>> +程式碼進入主線是提高程式碼品質、降低維護和分發成本、提高對核心開發方向的影響程度
>>   等的關鍵。這是一種共贏的局面。啓動你的編輯器，來加入我們吧；你會非常受歡迎的。
>>
>> --
>> 2.43.0
>>

Re: [PATCH v2] docs: zh_TW: process: localize terminologies and improve fluency in 8.Conclusion

[Weijie Yuan]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:05:47PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> 
> On 7/10/26 4:49 PM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> > Gentle ping.
> > 
> > This v2 addressed the review comments from Alex and Dongliang.
> > Is there anything else I should improve, or is it queued somewhere
> > I might have missed?
> 
> It seems like Alex is not on the cc list. None can pick up this patch.
> 
> Add Alex into this thread.
> 
> Dongliang Mu

I suspect that some contributors would run the get_maintainers.pl script
or b4 prep --auto-to-cc, so they did not cc Alex, as they didn't know
the current situation. Because I noticed that for both two versions,
Chen-yu didn't cc Alex or Dongliang or Yanteng. Am I right, @Chen-yu? ;-)

Therefore, how about adding zh_CN team temporarily to zh_TW in
MAINTAINERS file? So that it won't confuse newcomers in the near future.

Thanks,
Weijie