Hello Schalk, thanks for your quick reply. On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 12:23:56AM +0100, "Schalk W. Cronjé" wrote: > Absolutely, please remove the text and adjust the license to be the > same as whatever af_ZA, en_ZA are licensed as nowadays.
This is not possible: af_ZA has no clause while en_ZA has has the same
problematic text as en_BW and en_ZW.
The "no clause" text can be interpreted to be the same license as
(e)glibc, but if possible an concrete license would be preferable, so
either "LGPL v 2.1 or later" or maybe "same license than (e)glibc".
> I have added that text way back in the 90s when the localisation
> effort was just starting in Southern Africa. It is worth a review
> anyway. I have CC'd Dwayne Bailey who coordinated *_ZA locales
> subsequently.
Thanks. I was going to mail him later for "his" locales.
Greetings
Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de
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
Description: Digital signature
