FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Launchpad User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-29-2008, 07:11 AM
Sebastian Heinlein
 
Default BSD licence

Hello,

the newly added licence agreement in Rosetta includes the following
statement:

"If you choose not to use the BSD licence, we will remove your
translations from Launchpad shortly after July 31st."

Are we going to loose all the translation of former and no longer active
translators? Do you have got any data on how many translations we would
loose?

Will there be a special mark in the exported po files for BSD licenced
messages?

How can I merge my translation upstream if they use an alternative
licence, e.g. GPL? They would have to include a quiet odd licence
statement, right?

Regards,

Sebastian
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-29-2008, 07:16 AM
Mackenzie Morgan
 
Default BSD licence

On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 09:11 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> How can I merge my translation upstream if they use an alternative
> licence, e.g. GPL? They would have to include a quiet odd licence
> statement, right?

Changing anything from BSD to GPL is easy. It's the reverse that's
impossible.

--
Mackenzie Morgan
http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com
apt-get moo
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-29-2008, 11:12 AM
Sebastian Heinlein
 
Default BSD licence

Am Sonntag, den 29.06.2008, 03:16 -0400 schrieb Mackenzie Morgan:
> On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 09:11 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> > How can I merge my translation upstream if they use an alternative
> > licence, e.g. GPL? They would have to include a quiet odd licence
> > statement, right?
>
> Changing anything from BSD to GPL is easy. It's the reverse that's
> impossible.

But what about translations/suggestions made from other people? I would
have to ask every translator if he or she agrees to the re-licensing. So
I would have to write a lot of emails.

Or are the Launchpad translations still under a dual licence? The BSD
and the upstream one? Should we add a dual licencing agreement to our
translation team policy?

Cheers,

Sebastian
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-29-2008, 02:30 PM
Bruce Cowan
 
Default BSD licence

On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 09:11 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> "If you choose not to use the BSD licence, we will remove your
> translations from Launchpad shortly after July 31st."
>
> Are we going to loose all the translation of former and no longer active
> translators? Do you have got any data on how many translations we would
> loose?

Of course, in my opinion, Ubuntu shouldn't do its own translation work
anyway.
--
Bruce Cowan <bcowan@fastmail.co.uk>


--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-29-2008, 02:53 PM
Sebastian Heinlein
 
Default BSD licence

Am Sonntag, den 29.06.2008, 13:59 +0200 schrieb Przemysław Kulczycki:
> Sebastian Heinlein pisze:
> > Am Sonntag, den 29.06.2008, 03:16 -0400 schrieb Mackenzie Morgan:
> >> On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 09:11 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> >>> How can I merge my translation upstream if they use an alternative
> >>> licence, e.g. GPL? They would have to include a quiet odd licence
> >>> statement, right?
> >> Changing anything from BSD to GPL is easy. It's the reverse that's
> >> impossible.
> >
> > But what about translations/suggestions made from other people? I would
> > have to ask every translator if he or she agrees to the re-licensing. So
> > I would have to write a lot of emails.
>
> You don't have to. You can include BSD-licensed translations in upstream
> GPL translations with asking anyone. The whole work gets a GPL license
> because of GPL's reciprocity clause, and the BSD-licensed parts stay
> under BSD license. You just have to keep license notices in the
> BSD-licensed parts.
> See Software Freedom Law Center's publication: "Maintaining
> Permissive-Licensed Files in a GPL-Licensed Project: Guidelines for
> Developers"
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html

I am not sure if the corresponding upstream projects want to add a BSD
license header to their po files. Does anybody know what the large
upstream projects e.g. GNOME/KDE think about this?

Cheers,

Sebastian
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-29-2008, 03:00 PM
Mackenzie Morgan
 
Default BSD licence

On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 16:53 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> I am not sure if the corresponding upstream projects want to add a BSD
> license header to their po files. Does anybody know what the large
> upstream projects e.g. GNOME/KDE think about this?

I thought the BSD license allowed it to be re-licensed (at least, it
doesn't say you can't), provided the copyright notice was still
attached. GPL also requires that copyright notices remain intact, I
think (or at least doesn't mandate that they be removed), so there's no
discrepancy and they can be re-licensed as GPL from BSD without issue.

--
Mackenzie Morgan
http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com
apt-get moo
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-29-2008, 06:32 PM
"Caroline Ford"
 
Default BSD licence

2008/6/29 Sebastian Heinlein <glatzor@ubuntu.com>:
> Hello,
>
> the newly added licence agreement in Rosetta includes the following
> statement:
>
> "If you choose not to use the BSD licence, we will remove your
> translations from Launchpad shortly after July 31st."
>
> Are we going to loose all the translation of former and no longer active
> translators? Do you have got any data on how many translations we would
> loose?
>
> Will there be a special mark in the exported po files for BSD licenced
> messages?
>
> How can I merge my translation upstream if they use an alternative
> licence, e.g. GPL? They would have to include a quiet odd licence
> statement, right?

I'm now worried that we (upstream) may have to remove the translations
we synced from Rosetta. Aren't they currently under the license
upstream chooses?

Caroline

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-30-2008, 08:21 AM
 
Default BSD licence

Hi Caroline,

Yesterday at 20:32, Caroline Ford wrote:

> I'm now worried that we (upstream) may have to remove the translations
> we synced from Rosetta. Aren't they currently under the license
> upstream chooses?

In theory, yes. However, it was easy to re-use suggestions from other
projects, so people _have_ reused suggestions with different licenses
already. Basically, we can say that we put the responsibility on
translators to know what they can relicense under project's license,
and in most cases, they were not really allowed to (i.e. one can't
relicense else's stuff).

If you are interested in being totally legal, it's a choice between
you accepting contributions under BSD license, or accepting
contributions under a bunch of other free software licenses (i.e. GPL,
LGPL, MPL,...) — because suggestions, which translators have probably
made use of, came under that bunch of licenses.

I feel the former option is both better and easier for you.

Our alternative solution would be not to show suggestions from other
projects, but that would defeat the purpose of having a large, shared
translations database.

Also, I wonder how are BSD-licensed translations negatively affecting
your upstream project?

(i.e. GNU applications, including those under GPL with strict
copyright assignment in writing, use completely public domain
translations)

Cheers,
Danilo

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-30-2008, 10:05 AM
 
Default BSD licence

danilo@canonical.com (Danilo *egan) writes:

> Hi Caroline,
>
> Yesterday at 20:32, Caroline Ford wrote:
>
>> I'm now worried that we (upstream) may have to remove the translations
>> we synced from Rosetta. Aren't they currently under the license
>> upstream chooses?
>
> In theory, yes. However, it was easy to re-use suggestions from other
> projects, so people _have_ reused suggestions with different licenses
> already. Basically, we can say that we put the responsibility on
> translators to know what they can relicense under project's license,
> and in most cases, they were not really allowed to (i.e. one can't
> relicense else's stuff).
>
> If you are interested in being totally legal, it's a choice between
> you accepting contributions under BSD license, or accepting
> contributions under a bunch of other free software licenses (i.e. GPL,
> LGPL, MPL,...) — because suggestions, which translators have probably
> made use of, came under that bunch of licenses.
>
> I feel the former option is both better and easier for you.

I don't understand, but these strings came from upstream translations?
If yes, the Ubuntu translators mustn't modify them without asking to the
upstream translators.

> Our alternative solution would be not to show suggestions from other
> projects, but that would defeat the purpose of having a large, shared
> translations database.
>
> Also, I wonder how are BSD-licensed translations negatively affecting
> your upstream project?

I think they negatively affect also the Ubuntu translations made in Launchpad, because who
spends some time and energy for providing a quality translation if
someone can later distribute this one in a closed way and
under his own license? The BSD licence can encourage the behaviour of
profiting from the others' work without costs.

So I fear a lack of motivation for contributing to the Ubuntu
translations if we use this license amd my big question is:
What's the rationale for using this license? I ask because I haven't seen till now any
discussion in this ml about this change.

> (i.e. GNU applications, including those under GPL with strict
> copyright assignment in writing, use completely public domain
> translations)

If they are under GPL, this isn't possible because the translation
makes a derived work. Could you make some examples of this behaviour?

--
luca, (ᴉ) innurindi
Luca Padrin
sistemi software
email/jabber: luca@innurindi.net
impronta gpg: 43D7 D917 B86A C6F2 B4B6 3B68 85FE 2372 3F0B B7DB
fellow della Free Software Foundation Europe

"I' walking down to emperors bay,
A signal, a sound, dolphins at play."
(emperors ballad, 2008-04-29)

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 
Old 06-30-2008, 11:03 AM
Matthias Urlichs
 
Default BSD licence

Hi,

luca (ᴉ) innurindi:
> I think they negatively affect also the Ubuntu translations made in
> Launchpad, because who spends some time and energy for providing a
> quality translation if someone can later distribute this one in a
> closed way and under his own license?

Ummm, in theory, yes, but ...

> The BSD licence can encourage the behaviour of profiting from the
> others' work without costs.

... we're talking about translations of some specific, open-source-
licensed software here. Presumably the translations are of no use if you
don't already have the software. And the translations, once shipped with
said software, will inherit its license (being derived works).


LP suggests translations from other source packages than the one you're
working on, and which may be under a different (and possibly incompatible)
license. This might be a legal problem.

You can either stop suggesting treanslations, which causes
(a) inconsistencies and (b) duplicate work ...

... or you place the aggregate body of translations in Launchpad under
the most liberal license possible, and hope that nobody who translated
software A complains when his translation of string B ends up in
incompatibly-licensed package C, after translator D copied a suggestion
across.

Until somebody has a better idea, I'd suggest the latter solution.

--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | smurf@smurf.noris.de
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
- -
If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:54 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org