Re: Unification of free software disclaimers
On 12/07/2006, at 3:27 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote: However, I think that it's important to have translated licences since a lot of people don't speak English at all and these people are part of our common target group, provided: * These translations include the official translation disclaimer both in English and translated; Yes, please! GNOME is the only place I have found these licences translated without the GNU disclaimer. See my other email on this topic. * Ideally, the original English licence is included or, better, a link or something else pointing to it; * This refers to the docs module as well, not only to the About boxes; * We're talking only about the FSF licences. GNOME is part of the GNU Project and uses the copyleft licences that FSF has created. The other less common ones just don't matter. I think the OFL [1] is worth considering, especially if we include fonts with our distro. from Clytie (vi-VN, Vietnamese free-software translation team / nhóm Việt hóa phần mềm tự do) http://groups-beta.google.com/group/vi-VN [1] Open Font Licence: http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php? site_id=nrsiid=OFL ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Unification of free software disclaimers
[It seems that the discussion is going on at that bug; however, I don't feel qualified enough to comment there so I'll write here.] Александър Шопов wrote: For example, these will become: This program is free software; you can This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful GNU General Public License along with this program I agree here, it should be the standard one. However, I think that it's important to have translated licences since a lot of people don't speak English at all and these people are part of our common target group, provided: * These translations include the official translation disclaimer both in English and translated; * Ideally, the original English licence is included or, better, a link or something else pointing to it; * This refers to the docs module as well, not only to the About boxes; * We're talking only about the FSF licences. GNOME is part of the GNU Project and uses the copyleft licences that FSF has created. The other less common ones just don't matter. The Bulgarian translation of the GPL sucks [1] entirely due to our fault, as we failed to organise as a translation team to produce a decent one and thus are referring to a 3rd party translation. I've been told that some languages have the licences properly translated so this is not a reason not to mark them as translatable. [1] FYI, I've removed the links to the GPL/FDL translations from www.gnu.org, the amended pages should appear shortly. -- In the GNU Project, discrimination against proprietary software is not just a policy -- it's the principle and the purpose. Proprietary software is fundamentally unjust and wrong, so when we have the opportunity to place it at a disadvantage, that is a good thing. --RMS ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Unification of free software disclaimers
Hi guys, It seems that most programs are getting the GNU GPL disclaimers in their interface. Can we have these messages unified? 1. Can they be shown in widgets that do not need explicit new lines and do the wordflow themselves? 2. Can we use the template This program instead of the real name of the program? Thus fewer mistakes will be made. For example, these will become: Sound Juicer is free software; you can Sound Juicer is distributed in the hope that it will be useful GNU General Public License along with Sound Juicer This program is free software; you can This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful GNU General Public License along with this program Even the GNU GPL v.2 advises to do so: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#TOC4 It will be easier for translators, strings will not get fuzzy when program names change etc., etc. We still have time to cleanup this until next release. Kind regards: al_shopov ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Unification of free software disclaimers
On 7/9/06, Alexander Shopov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi guys, It seems that most programs are getting the GNU GPL disclaimers in their interface. Can we have these messages unified? 1. Can they be shown in widgets that do not need explicit new lines and do the wordflow themselves? 2. Can we use the template This program instead of the real name of the program? Thus fewer mistakes will be made. There are some discussions going on about putting common license templates into gtk+, which can then be shown in the about boxes of applications using gtk+ if the application authors enable it: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=336225 I'm not sure of how the discussions about localization of the licenses fit into this, though, or what the outcome has been. If you have anything to add to the proposals in the bug report, then please do. Christian ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
