Ubuntu start page translation
Can someone tell me where is the translation interface for this page: http://start.ubuntu.com/8.04/ I just saw the Hebrew translation and its awful. Also, the text is LTR when its supposed to be RTL (yet this is probably a bug issue). Thanks, Eyal -- ubuntu-translators mailing list ubuntu-translators@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
Re: BSD licence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Danilo Šegan) writes:
> Hi Luca,
Hi Danilo
thanks for your reply, I read it carefully and have some
considerations about it.
> Yesterday at 12:05, luca innurindi wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> License changes will apply only to work contributed directly through
> Launchpad: upstream translations are not treated under the same rules.
Good, so the upstream translations remain with their own license, but
what do you think to do in the cases where an user uploads them after the
automatic
import in Launchpad because they weren't complete at that time?
> [...]
> So, while we do understand there are some risks, we feel they are very
> low.
Whty do you think so? IMHO I see nothing that prevents someone from
profiting from this license. Everyone registered in Launchpad can export the
pos and
distribute them with hia own license.
> And we are not alone in that, FSF feels the same way (judging by
> their actions):
>
> http://translationproject.org/html/whydisclaim.html
>
> As you can see there, many GPL projects which otherwise require strict
> copyright assignment in paper, require copyright _disclaimers_ when it
> comes to translations ("disclaiming a copyright" means that you are
> giving your work out into public domain; this is even "worse" than
> what BSD license does: BSD license allows you to still keep at least
> some rights, and in some countries, you can even revoke it if your
> "moral" rights have been violated).
I already know the policy of FSF but I don't see in this an assignment
of translations to public domain but a dislaimer for FSF on the translations
that the copyright holder has provided to FSF, not a disclaimer for everyone.
See for example from the form the translator must send to FSF:
" (though this disclaimer applies to all such translations that
I may subsequently provide to the FSF, whatever the language)"
And the reason because FSF requests this disclaimer could be seen in
my opinion similar to the reason for the assignment of copyright for software
provided to the FSF projects:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
that is a more effectiveness in protecting the GPL software and its
translations.
And let me make a question: if we distribute Ubuntu with a
license that meets our philosophy of Free Software and so
it's a GPL-like license, couldn't seem not strange for an user of this
software that we ditsribute the translations
that come with this software in another license?
I understand the motivations that this license could easily make the
translations reused by other open source projects getting some
consistency in opren source translations, but IMHO I don't see why we
have to adapt to licenses of other projects and not other projects to
adapt to our like-GPL license as we have now when it's written that
the license is the same of the software it comes with.
Sory for the long email, these are only my 2 cents if they could
contribute to the evaluation of the opportunity to change the license.
--
luca, (ᴉ) innurindi
Luca Padrin
sistemi software
email/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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)
--
ubuntu-translators mailing list
ubuntu-translators@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
Re: BSD licence
Hi Luca,
Yesterday at 12:05, luca innurindi wrote:
> 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.
License changes will apply only to work contributed directly through
Launchpad: upstream translations are not treated under the same rules.
>> 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.
https://help.launchpad.net/Translations/LicensingFAQ#Does%20that%20mean%20my%20translations%20may%20be%20used%20in%20proprietary%20software?
So, while we do understand there are some risks, we feel they are very
low. And we are not alone in that, FSF feels the same way (judging by
their actions):
http://translationproject.org/html/whydisclaim.html
As you can see there, many GPL projects which otherwise require strict
copyright assignment in paper, require copyright _disclaimers_ when it
comes to translations ("disclaiming a copyright" means that you are
giving your work out into public domain; this is even "worse" than
what BSD license does: BSD license allows you to still keep at least
some rights, and in some countries, you can even revoke it if your
"moral" rights have been violated).
> 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.
We've had a lot of discussion in the past (some on now extinct
rosetta-users) list, and had more input from Launchpad Beta testers.
I am sorry to hear that you'd lose the motivation to do any
translations for Ubuntu, though.
Rationale is provided on the license question page, and also in the
FAQ:
https://help.launchpad.net/Translations/LicensingFAQ#Why%20is%20this%20needed?
>> (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?
Yes, look at the above mentioned TranslationProject page. FSF asks
all translators to submit their translations into public domain.
This is also mentioned in the FAQ:
https://help.launchpad.net/Translations/LicensingFAQ#Why%20not%20public%20domain%20like%20the%20FSF%27s%20Translation%20Project?
Cheers,
Danilo
--
ubuntu-translators mailing list
ubuntu-translators@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
Re: BSD licence
> I really don't understand this. If I've modified an upstream translation which > is under GPL and then published my work (making it avaible in Rosetta is a > publication) it has to be under GPL, according the terms of GPL > itself. > > Bruno Key word is "modified" here. Yes, If you modify, it should keep original license. If you translate, you license your translation BSD, and therefore it can be included in package you translate AND can be offered as suggestion to other translators when translating other packages under different licenses. However, all this is some sort of speculation, because I still would like to hear someone from Launchpad/Cannonical to say something on this. Cheers, Peter. -- ubuntu-translators mailing list ubuntu-translators@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
Re: BSD licence
--- Mar 1/7/08, Matthew East <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto: > The problem with that is that because of the fact that > translations > from upstream are generally not imported immediately in > Ubuntu, and > the solution is often for the translation team to upload > the upstream > translation in Rosetta. At least I believe that is how the > Italian > team does things. Yes, we've always done that for speeding up the process. > That will no longer be possible, if > I've understood > correctly. I don't know... but probably when you upload a translation from upstream and publish it as "coming from upstream", it should maintains its license; if you publish it as a "user upload" then, as Danilo said, you're messing up a little bit the translations and in that case you're publishing under BSD. At least that's how I have interpreted the all thing... -- Milo Casagrande Hai un indirizzo email difficile da ricordare? Scegli quello che hai sempre desiderato su Yahoo! Mail http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nuovo_indirizzo.html -- ubuntu-translators mailing list ubuntu-translators@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
Re: BSD licence
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Peteris Krisjanis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/6/30 luca (ᴉ) innurindi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> And it still exists the problem with the upstream translations: we >> can't use them if they are in GPL because in this way we change >> arbitrary their license. > > BSD license is meant just for translation entered within Launchpad > system (as far as I understand) - system give you a string, you > translate it, therefore license it BSD and Launchpad can use this > exact string to compare it with others. In same time, it can be > included in all kind of software, even in that for what you originaly > made your translation for. It is a win-win. > > So, in nutshell, imported translations (from projects sources) keep > their license. Translations made within Rosetta via form or upload by > user gets BSD licensed (if user has agreed on that) and can be used as > suggestions for other, not just GPL or LGPL software. The problem with that is that because of the fact that translations from upstream are generally not imported immediately in Ubuntu, and the solution is often for the translation team to upload the upstream translation in Rosetta. At least I believe that is how the Italian team does things. That will no longer be possible, if I've understood correctly. -- Matthew East http://www.mdke.org gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF -- ubuntu-translators mailing list ubuntu-translators@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
