Re: BSD licence

[Sebastian Heinlein <glatzor@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Am Sonntag, den 29.06.2008, 13:59 +0200 schrieb Przemysław Kulczycki:
> Sebastian Heinlein pisze:
> > Am Sonntag, den 29.06.2008, 03:16 -0400 schrieb Mackenzie Morgan:
> >> On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 09:11 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> >>> How can I merge my translation upstream if they use an alternative
> >>> licence, e.g. GPL? They would have to include a quiet odd licence
> >>> statement, right?
> >> Changing anything from BSD to GPL is easy.  It's the reverse that's
> >> impossible.
> > 
> > But what about translations/suggestions made from other people? I would
> > have to ask every translator if he or she agrees to the re-licensing. So
> > I would have to write a lot of emails.
> 
> You don't have to. You can include BSD-licensed translations in upstream 
> GPL translations with asking anyone. The whole work gets a GPL license 
> because of GPL's reciprocity clause, and the BSD-licensed parts stay 
> under BSD license. You just have to keep license notices in the 
> BSD-licensed parts.
> See Software Freedom Law Center's publication: "Maintaining 
> Permissive-Licensed Files in a GPL-Licensed Project: Guidelines for 
> Developers"
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html

I am not sure if the corresponding upstream projects want to add a BSD
license header to their po files. Does anybody know what the large
upstream projects e.g. GNOME/KDE think about this?

Cheers,

Sebastian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil