User talk:Onkobu

From Gentoo Wiki
Jump to:navigation Jump to:search
Before creating a discussion or leaving a comment, please read about using talk pages. To create a new discussion, click here. Comments on an existing discussion should be signed using ~~~~:
A comment [[User:Larry|Larry]] 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
: A reply [[User:Sally|Sally]] 01:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:: Your reply ~~~~

Centralized authentication using OpenLDAP

Talk status
This discussion is still ongoing.

I had no choice but to revert all the work here. The translations were heavily impacted and most of the work would be lost. Please just add to this article while not touching the T:### comments unless an entire block is deleted. They cannot be copied (besides moving a whole block) or improvised. Any deleted block is lost forever. Thank you. --Grknight (talk) 15:07, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

So I can't proceed any further. The article was useless from technical and security perspective. Tried to setup and failed more than I succeeded. Presumably the translations either deviated to a more usable form which never made it into the English version or was left unchanged way before the main article broke. Dropping the translations in favor of a working current state would suite me better. Or maybe setting the current state aside/ archive it if relevant for older versions – I'd prefer using the history then.
I also wasn't aware of the comment's purpose. Makes editing very hard since I can't keep numbers in mind and can't produce reliable sequences. Any tooling? Shouldn't also translators – if they exist – watch the original page? Or at least the translated page should point out deviation as soon as the foundation changed? (I can think of more situations where mapping a paragraph's identifier from one language to another doesn't make any sense at all than where it succeeds by default.) --Onkobu (talk) 14:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
You don't worry about numbering or sequencing as there is a tool for that. What editors have to watch is that the comments stick to the same paragraphs and only remove them if the entire paragraph is removed. If the entire paragraph moves to another part of the same article, the comment goes with it. They cannot be transferred between articles as the numbers are unique to each article so new articles need to have no translation tags as it starts fresh. Because of this, moving bits of an already translated article is difficult and requires restarting translation for all languages from scratch for the new articles. --Grknight (talk) 14:03, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for introducing to me the magic comments – I'll adhere to the rules. For the special case of the Centralized authentication using OpenLDAP rewriting/ retranslating from scratch will be the consequence anyway. (I assume there is a sort of counter per page. In case a paraghraph is added anywhere it gets that new number assigned. Also replacing the entire content with all new paragraphs yields increasing paragraph numbering comments!?) What I accidentally/ not knowing did was writing new paragraphs under existing numbering comments.
What about moving parts of the article to a sub page, e.g. the hints/ suggestions on performance? I assume they should move incl. their numbering comments since they still exist. Translation could be moved, too if the structure is kept in sync. (Your explanation only contains the case of number clashes when moving parts between existing pages.)
This is flawed thinking. Translations cannot move except when an entire page changes its name. Any removal of a section will delete its translation. The article should stay as is for formatting. --Grknight (talk) 20:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I missed one thing on »Avoid changes« (first bullet). Please revert all the changes I made to the Centralized-article. I can't think of a way to turn it within finite time into the contemporary working shape while staying away from »flawed thinking«. I'll also keep this in mind for future changes. I don't feel insulted but I can't wrap my head around it.