[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Translations was Re: [Gnumed-devel] Interest in GNUmed

From: Jim Busser
Subject: Re: Translations was Re: [Gnumed-devel] Interest in GNUmed
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:17:56 -0700

On 2009-10-26, at 3:49 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:

While technically I don't see a problem with that we've been
discussing licensing implications regarding the translated
terms without coming to a safe conclusion.

I would have a hard time arguing that the translations (single words or short strings of words) need to be kept GPL.

I would accept the argument that it is not the individual translated items (words or phrases) that is unique, but the aggregated collection, and recognizing that in our case the .po files are mixes of clinical words with technical strings – many of which would be functional gibberish if transplanted into some other system – I truly can't see a problem with the translations being BSD.

If you were wondering about licence conflicts I do not see any reason why the project contributors (whose base project code is already GPL) could not be argued as capable to make their translation contributions dual-licensed i.e.
- BSD for any who would see a value to use the translations
- GPL for the .po files as incorporated into the GNUmed CVS (or future git) tree.

Do we need to verify this?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]