[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n-doc
Subject:    Re: License for _desktop_, _json_ and appdata po (ca, uk, maybe
From:       Antoni_Bella_Pérez <antonibella5 () yahoo ! com>
Date:       2019-07-09 4:14:07
Message-ID: 1143493171.6849081.1562645647483 () mail ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,  
   Valencian Language is affected, too.  
   My option for this files are 'same license'.  
   Regards     Toni
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On dl., de jul. 8, 2019 at 23:35, Luigi Toscano<luigi.toscano@tiscali.it> wrote:   Hi,

looking at the files I think that this message affects for Catalan and
Ukrainian: can you please recheck the license of po files which ends up into
the appdata files? Most of the appdata files are distributed under the CC0-1.0
license, and adding an LGPL license may complicate the work of the distributor
a bit.
The same topic apply to _desktop_.po and _json_.po files, where usually the
license of the program applies.

The use of a different license for the other files is already a mild
complication, but at least those files are on their own; on the other hand, we
don't have a proper way right now to inject the copyright and translations of
those special po files into the original file. And frankly speaking, I'd
really prefer a bit more of homogeneity here, which would simplify everyone's
life.

If anyone else had no idea about this licensing issue and assumed something
different about the license of their files, please speak up.

My tl;dr suggestion is: please use a "this use the same license of the
original file" for ._desktop_.po, _json_.po and org.kde.*.appdata.po files, or
at least a dual license (either the same license, or LGPL or whatever other).

-- 
Luigi
  

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<div id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645364822" style="font-family: \
sans-serif;">&nbsp; Hi,&nbsp;</div><div id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645480139" \
style="font-family: sans-serif;"><br></div><div \
id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645475431" style="font-family: sans-serif;">&nbsp; \
Valencian Language is affected, too.&nbsp;</div><div \
id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645303629" style="font-family: \
sans-serif;"><br></div><div id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645521495" \
style="font-family: sans-serif;">&nbsp; My option for this files are 'same \
license'.&nbsp;</div><div id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645521937" \
style="font-family: sans-serif;"><br></div><div \
id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645308898" style="font-family: sans-serif;">&nbsp; \
Regards&nbsp;</div><div id="yMail_cursorElementTracker_1562645304131" \
style="font-family: sans-serif;">&nbsp; Toni</div><br><div \
id="ymail_android_signature"><a id="ymail_android_signature_link" \
href="https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&amp;c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr \
oidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&amp;af_wl=ym&amp;af_sub1=Internal&amp;af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&amp;af_sub3=EmailSignature">Sent \
from Yahoo Mail on Android</a></div> <br> <blockquote style="margin: 0 0 20px 0;"> \
<div style="font-family:Roboto, sans-serif; color:#6D00F6;"> <div>On dl., de jul. 8, \
2019 at 23:35, Luigi Toscano</div><div>&lt;luigi.toscano@tiscali.it&gt; wrote:</div> \
</div> <div style="padding: 10px 0 0 20px; margin: 10px 0 0 0; border-left: 1px solid \
#6D00F6;"> <div dir="ltr">Hi,<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div \
dir="ltr">looking at the files I think that this message affects for Catalan \
and<br></div><div dir="ltr">Ukrainian: can you please recheck the license of po files \
which ends up into<br></div><div dir="ltr">the appdata files? Most of the appdata \
files are distributed under the CC0-1.0<br></div><div dir="ltr">license, and adding \
an LGPL license may complicate the work of the distributor<br></div><div dir="ltr">a \
bit.<br></div><div dir="ltr">The same topic apply to _desktop_.po and _json_.po \
files, where usually the<br></div><div dir="ltr">license of the program \
applies.<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">The use of a different \
license for the other files is already a mild<br></div><div dir="ltr">complication, \
but at least those files are on their own; on the other hand, we<br></div><div \
dir="ltr">don't have a proper way right now to inject the copyright and translations \
of<br></div><div dir="ltr">those special po files into the original file. And frankly \
speaking, I'd<br></div><div dir="ltr">really prefer a bit more of homogeneity here, \
which would simplify everyone's<br></div><div dir="ltr">life.<br></div><div \
dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">If anyone else had no idea about this licensing \
issue and assumed something<br></div><div dir="ltr">different about the license of \
their files, please speak up.<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">My \
tl;dr suggestion is: please use a "this use the same license of the<br></div><div \
dir="ltr">original file" for ._desktop_.po, _json_.po and org.kde.*.appdata.po files, \
or<br></div><div dir="ltr">at least a dual license (either the same license, or LGPL \
or whatever other).<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">-- \
<br></div><div dir="ltr">Luigi<br></div> </div> </blockquote>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]