Re: License and Copyright info for debconf translation of aide package

Helge Kreutzmann <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.internationalization.general
Message-ID <20210119163143.GA10402@Debian-50-lenny-64-minimal>
Helo Marc,
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 04:32:04PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-i18n, please Cc me on replies]
> 
> Hi,
> 
> while reviewing the aide package for writing a machine-readable
> debian/copyright file, I have stumbled up on the translations.
> 
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/aide/-/tree/master/debian/po
> 
> Oh, what a mess.

Welcome in the world if i18n. Really, this is, unfortunately, quite
common. I've faced similar endavors like you did.

> Boilerplate headers that have not been filled out, licenseless files, po
> files putting the aide translation under the same license as the postfix
> package (an obvious cut&paste error). Most of the files have not been
> touched for a decade, and I doubt that the original translators are
> still around. The good side is that the Debconf templates have also been
> stable since 2006.
> 
> What am I supposed to do to get the translations
> - reviewed
> - properly filled out
> - properly licensed to a license that actually fits the package?

You can most certainly do this, but is it really worth the effort? 

> Is there a mechanism that saves me from talking to each and every
> language mailing list, some of them looking as if the inhabitants have a
> very well thought out subject tagging method.

Well, I would first start using podebconf-report-po(1). You can tweak
the message to your liking, explaining what you want to achieve. This
is necessary, as 100% files are usually not necessarily reviewed again
or even considered (given the huge volume of work for l10n teams still
ahead).

But first check the headers if the translation lists are filled out
properly (i.e. exist). 

> Can I safely assume that a translation without an explicit license was
> meant to be licensed with the package, which would be GPL-2+ in this
> case?

I do not know, I'm not a lawyer. You might check on debian-legal for
this.

Greetings

            Helge


-- 
      Dr. Helge Kreutzmann                     [email protected]
           Dipl.-Phys.                   http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
        64bit GNU powered                     gpg signed mail preferred
           Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=cZiw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.