On Sat, Jan 16, 1999 at 10:03:38AM -0800, Guy Maor wrote:
> There's currently a package in Incoming, sympa, with a copyright file
> written in French. This raises a host of potential problems, and may
> require some policy changes.
>
> Should an English translation be required? Currently a user need only
> speak English to decide if a package is free enough for him.
I think it should be.
>
> What if the translation is wrong and implies that a free package is
> non-free or vice-versa? We should request that the upstream author
> bless the translation. If we're unable to do this we can perhaps
> write in the copyright file that this version is not canonical, and
> that copyright.fr (for example) is. I'm not sure if this is a good
> idea.
A translation can NEVER be considered "official", since it has no
legal value, the original (unstranslated) copyright should remain.
This is what happens with documentation translated in the LDP.
>
> Maybe translations are only required for non-free packages? For free
> packages the user is happy with DFSG-freeness. But the user might
> want certain abilities that DFSG-free packages don't necessarily have.
>
>
> Guy
>
Anyhow,I think a translation would be necessary, and it's not that
much of an effor (IMHO), even for DFSG-free packages. Of course, if the
license is GNU/Artistic/BSD, change it to link to the ones in /usr/doc
Javi
