From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C96A15FD19; Mon, 27 May 2024 14:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716821736; cv=none; b=kMeLdXWmhkO8e/hMf/TYVM7EnAObRydUaq/zreA2vbsjgCTboGh6vetIMtqV1rsiSXGUPbnpt9GKujTV0esclmdAt1O3myVK/tvI8oUEKbDYYhOwZBr9TbvqqQdJ2Kq4CwtNVOcUsyl6cutqL8H2E4H7QkGr2n2JthY0G7OVkUo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716821736; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WqdfSky25P014jToQJxbbx2jmpw/Y6gIbx3q5jkMXhQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=r0oXFDlfO+oXok30RXIXuKr38vstRx2h+cJ3MvyfN/I/egpHWqJyytM9bXPKuuRAWj/7QMsD0UX2uaN6wdpozc8oJ5c3YIwEtvsrXx7Vq7J/+3P/ECBO8oiV6jnIAheAxqy3UO6VM3knhRp11lqopBqelu3SYz6rYZYHs0YEknk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=OpSRQSnA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="OpSRQSnA" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 3BD0547C39 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1716821734; bh=JUk9kiyoUx5RdgIxL9VYYk1ttK/biBJXbO+frYzpI0E=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=OpSRQSnAig4IIYY8BNqix2k+Yb6FWJLwUUDh/7zJR3VliwFvSwhjOVu+Z00OWVUTi KVw4IkJcG5msbhLvlUo1sTFRWleDxOukx7T4tmzLHByyJOy6WBoMQSoE6Z4VSj5BNh wCoU4L9+TRxIe0jBtjA1q9CovmgzTdxCOQMzpRLTRj3LkpHIAEgFEA6yy5+Q2HGI0Q FM43LYmqlZedmh5NcbRxWKNjYk8UYXdxqSsRLcfqgT+CyufHyV+BJrCbjenZAOG8kO 7LfrCr41ZPvqI+8bFU0s7/jDCVKQxYGIJHgACbRe+inNRNKS/hgtXKkEvGcJaSVSbY agwtFAZLmVOSA== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:625::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3BD0547C39; Mon, 27 May 2024 14:55:34 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Yunseong Kim Cc: skhan@linuxfoundation.org, Jinwoo Park , Austin Kim , shjy180909@gmail.com, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: cve Korean translation In-Reply-To: <8880b0ec-9315-428e-b9c4-e578690d3c08@gmail.com> References: <20240527103003.29318-1-yskelg@gmail.com> <87ikyzpgqz.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <87o78rnz3a.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <8880b0ec-9315-428e-b9c4-e578690d3c08@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 08:55:33 -0600 Message-ID: <877cffnw2i.fsf@meer.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yunseong Kim writes: > On 5/27/24 10:50 =EC=98=A4=ED=9B=84, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >> Yunseong Kim writes: >>=20 >>>> 1) Why do I have three versions of it in my mailbox, sent over a period >>>> of 13 minutes? What changed between the versions? >>> >>> Sorry, I forgot the name of the reviewer when I first sent the >>> documentation content related patch version 2. >>=20 >> Which is fine, but... >>=20 >>>> Normally, you want to wait for reviews to come in on one version >>>> before posting the next, and you should put a comment after the "--= -" >>>> line saying what changed. >>>> >>>> 2) When did this review from Jinwoo Park happen? I was not copied on >>>> that. >>=20 >> You did not answer this question. Reviews should generally be done in >> public, but that does not seem to have happened here? > > Oops, sorry about that, Jonathan. > > Jinwoo Park sent me the review below, and I've updated some of ambiguous > words in patch version 2. > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/57f0d90c-4cc6-4418-ab79-6ae026d8ae09@gm= ail.com/T/#t It does look like the patch was reviewed, but no Reviewed-by tag was offered. *Never* apply a Reviewed-by tag that has not been explicitly given to you. Jinwoo, would you like to offer that tag for this patch? Thanks, jon