Re: [Gajim-devel] Licence incompatibility -- GPL and OpenSSL
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 02:48:45PM +0100, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: We do not ship with py-OpenSSL. We do not include any of the code from py-OpenSSL. I never said you did. I don't see where we are violating any license. You are violating your own license, the GPL. OpenSSL is loaded at runtime, but GPL doesn't cover which code is allowed to be run in memory, Please. All libraries you link against should be under a GPL-compatible license. The fact that you link with libssl via a python wrapper does not alleviate that. Additionally, GPL explicitely allows mere aggregation, so even our Windows binaries are no This is not about mere aggregation at all. http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/29c7588fbecproblem, as OpenSSL is a separate DLL which is loaded at runtime. The link doesn't work for me, but the situation on POSIX systems is the same -- when you do import OpenSSL.SSL and then use OpenSSL facilities, they don't come from PyOpenSSL's independent SSL implementation (as there isn't any), they come from libssl. So the .so is loaded at runtime as well. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] [commit-gajim] r10863 - branches/gajim_0.12/po
Yann Leboulanger wrote: That's true, but from a user point of view, having a 40% completed translation is very unpleasant. This is certainly only your opinion. Why impose your view to all users? Let every user decide -- if it's unpleasant and annoying, there are various ways for the end user to override that. By removing the translation, you don't give them any choice. In fact, some users (such as some of my friends and colleagues) will stop using the program only because of this. Switching read language is very not pleasant IMO. Not according to my experience. I even mix several languages: LANGUAGE=bg:mk:ru:sr:ro:uk:ar If the opinion that this is not userfriendly was widespread, the gettext manual would recommend developers to delete outdated translations, and it would be the established practice in the Free World. Note that even with a castrated translation, Gajim will still look partially translated by virtue of being a GTK+ app. (Fortunately, the GTK+ developers never delete translations -- I guess that makes the library not very pleasant in your eyes.) And we just removed those translations from release, not from trunk. How generous. Unfortunately this does not help the majority of users, who will install from the tarball or via their distro channels (which presumably would use the tarball as well). It's the time of blackmailed these days ! Indeed, this is a form of blackmailing. I definitely consider it as such. You are effectively saying to translators: Make sure you maintain your translation well, otherwise we may wipe out your work from the subsequent release(s). I don't think that any translator -- good or bad, diligent or lazy -- deserves such a treatment. We don't want to punish anyone, of course. But in effect you do exactly that. If you think this is a way to attract more translators, you are again wrong -- this is precisely the recipe to drive them away. Ask other seasoned translators, if you don't beleive me. It might be useful also to poll users who traditionally use a localized system. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] [commit-gajim] r10863 - branches/gajim_0.12/po
Yann Leboulanger wrote: I could return you this argument. No, that is not equivalent, really. (no, don't ask users to remove a po file, or set environment variables for Gajim, it's not user friendly) How is setting an environment variable (or a wrapper created only with a few clicks) less user-friendly than figuring out where to download the .po from, editing LINGUAS or compiling it and putting it in localedir? And the annoyance by a partial translation is a myth. Maybe it is rare to have partial translations for the major languages that have strong teams, but for the rest it is something natural. But if some people want the half translation, they can download the po file from svn. This is never going to happen. Well, never say never... I don't know what is the opinion of Gajim users, because we don't have a way to ask their opinion, but I would be happy to hear here what they think about that. I think this list is mostly read by developers and packagers, which excludes the target user base which should be polled. You think we do, we think we help users to have a nicer Gajim. Yes, I am sure that this decision was made with good intentions. I don't dispute that. But there's a reason why nearly nobody does this. If it was a good thing, people would have figured that out long time ago. I heard your complaint. Is it shared? Ask on gnome-i18n (for example) where people actually use localized environments and actively participate in translations. The opinion of a developer who doesn't use a localized MUA (which has a complete and excellent French translation, I'm told) is biased by definition. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] [commit-gajim] r10863 - branches/gajim_0.12/po
At Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:07:47 +0100, aste...@gajim.org wrote: Author: asterix Date: 2008-12-16 21:07:47 +0100 (Tue, 16 Dec 2008) New Revision: 10863 Removed: branches/gajim_0.12/po/br.po branches/gajim_0.12/po/el.po branches/gajim_0.12/po/nl.po branches/gajim_0.12/po/pt.po Log: remove translations that are less than 50% translated This is entirely inappropriate. There is nothing wrong in a partially translated program; otherwise msgfmt would consider untranslated/fuzzy messages a critical error. Removing incomplete translations has only nefarious effects: It is an insult to translators' work, it is a disservice to users who still prefer using programs in their native language, and it is a impolite to those who take advantage of the LANGUAGE environment variable and may use only a subset of the translated strings as fallback. Fortunately, only a few free software projects do this (Mozilla, OOo, Claws Mail, ...), and it is very disturbing to see Gajim joining them in this bad practice. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] [commit-gajim] r10863 - branches/gajim_0.12/po
Jonathan Schleifer wrote: No translation is better than a wrong and unmtaintained translation. Really? Unmaintained translations just accumulate more fuzzy and untranslated strings, which are *not* displayed at runtime. So basically, you are removing all translated strings that should be correct. OTOH, a 100% complete translation can be utterly wrong and unusable compared to a 40% complete good translation. Especially when this can even compromise security as important things are not translated well enough. Please explain how this can possibly happen. If el.po is outdated, untranslated and fuzzy strings will be displayed in English. If you delete the whole PO file, you just delete the valid Greek strings. Zero improvement, only regression. We therefore decided to only keep translations for which we have a maintainer. It is up to you to decide how to manage your own project, I just feel the need to tell you that this is wrong and arrogant. If you don't agree with the removal of a specific language, feel free to volunteer as a maintainer for it. Thanks for the reminder. While I speak several languages, I only translate to my native language, for a good reason. I am inclined to do the reverse -- if you continue with this practice, I think I will stop maintaining my own translation. I don't like the idea of punishing all our users by deleting my work if I can't catch up for a particular release. But that means you have to verify the translation makes sense etc. Even the best translator can't do that, which is why translation teams cooperate and try to fix bugs by looking at each others work, and processing users' bug reports. By deleting a translation just because it is not complete you are seriously interfering with this natural process, and this is harmful. It also opens the gate to lots of duplicate work -- a person may start translating 0.12 from scratch instead of stepping on the shoulders of previous translators. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] round 2, OSX
James Newton wrote: If you know of a way to support both OS/X and GNUstep then I will help out from my side. 99% of the GNUstep apps run on OS/X and on all platforms that GNUstep supports (all variants of GNU, *BSD, Windows and proprieatary Unix variants). So basically porting an application for GNUstep means porting to OS/X as well. GNUstep is a free implementation of the OpenStep specification (which now exists as Cocoa). In that sense, GNUstep is a free Cocoa and more (some may say less). Typically, Cocoa developers' interest in GNUstep is only portability-wise, as making their programs work for GNUstep is the only way to port them to Windows (which is, generally, very attractive for them). I dont own a machine with GNUstep installed and I probably never will. I can say the same thing for OS/X, except by s/probably/definitely/, at least until it is released as free software. Incidentally the GTK+ port uses Quartz and CF. So there's no way to make it work. Your approach seems to be the only possibility in that case, I guess. I'm not gonna get into pissing contest on the philosophy of free software. Beating people with an idea will never make them accept it. No surprise. Ethical considerations are off-topic on nearly every mailing list as they make people uneasy. This mini-discussion is no exception. But you have to bridge the gap to get people move from one camp to another. My observations are different. By porting powerful free software (such as Emacs, BASH, grep, sed, GTK+, GIMP, Dia, Gajim, etc.) to say, Windows, it makes that operating system more compelling. So Windows users see no reason to migrate to GNU when they have nearly all the features that those free programs provide. Either way, the popularity of free software is a shallow goal. It will inevitably happen even without our help. What's important is the philosophy of the Free Software Movement, which doesn't propagate to people's minds as easily as the programs themselves do. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] gajim ncurses interface
Thomas Prochaska wrote: because of the lack of an real good terminal jabber client This is my impression as well, with the exception of jabber.el, which is quite good and actively developed (actually my default client at home where it's not healthy to run Gajim). But I guess it's not an option for people that don't use Emacs. i wanted to write a ncurses frontend to gajim. It is better, IMVHO, to concentrate on GNU Freetalk [1] since the work you're going to do for console-based Gajim is likely to be more complicated than fixing the current freetalk. Freetalk has a nice concept, but the project stalled in the last year. They started implementing jingle functionality instead of fixing the important issues. [1] http://gnu.org/software/freetalk ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Ideas about a Gajim moto
Nikos Kouremenos wrote: Make your suggesstions please Gajim The freedom to chat Gajim Free speech and chat for GNOME Gajim Towards freedom and jabberization ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Gmail emoticons
Chris Cook wrote: I haven't seen a license so that's why I haven't suggested adding them to Gajim. Maybe I will look around and see if there is one specifically for those graphics. It would be nice if you check it, even if they wouldn't be included in Gajim (which depends on the licence, but also on the developers' decision), some of us prefer to use free software and free data only. On 6/18/06, Yavor Doganov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 16:06:14 ERROR 403: Forbidden. I see what the problem is now. My CMS requires modrewrite rules so you'd have to use a switch with wget or maybe use Firefox. Well, not explicitly Firefox, but I got the idea, thanks. -- Every non-free program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. --RMS ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
