httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yoshiki Hayashi <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/docs/manual urlmapping.xml.ja
Date Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:26:43 GMT
Joshua Slive <> writes:

> I've always leaned towards the more relaxed side of review standards on 
> translations, but our concensus policy has always been to have reviews on 
> anything non-english.

I believe the original intention to have reviews on
translations was to prevent absurd translation to go into
our repository.  IMHO, if one can be trusted enough to be a
committer, he/she can be trusted enough to decide whether
particular translation should go into the repository or
needs review first.

> I'm personally willing to see commit-then-review on small changes, as long 
> as the two of you promise to watch the commits and to inform us if you 
> ever stop watching the commits.

It seems nobody cared about review of Japanese translation
when I was the only committer.  I wonder why is this sudden
interest?  I'm curious because I've never seen the rule
enforced strictly except the translation is the first
submission of someone.  I also thought it *was* mostly for
non-committer patch submission.  The first time additional
reviewer is mentioned in my archive is the reply from Ricard
Oliva to your mail in March 21, 2001.

| 2. I think that we are going to try to make it a policy that we only
| accept non-english patches when we have at least one reviewer in addition
| to the author.  That way we avoid embarrassing stuff like the former Polish
| page and the current Brazilian Portuguese page.  An exception can be made
| in the case of the "It worked" page, since we certainly want to clean up
| the garbage that is there.  However, in the future, we probably won't
| accept patches this way.

Yoshiki Hayashi

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message