El día 06/02/2008 a 00:05 Arthur de Jong escribió... Attach: /home/rudy/dev/debian/l10n/po/po-debconf/hijack/nss-ldapd/es.po ES
> > On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 00:09 -0500, Rudy Godoy Guillén wrote: > > > Would you consider putting it under the LGPL (2.1 or later) instead of > > > the GPL? That way it is more easily distributable as part of nss-ldapd. > > > > I might consider yes, but I wonder what's the issue about GPL? > > I don't think there's a real issue per se (I'm not a license expert) but > I would like to limit the number of licenses that are used in the > package. That makes things more manageable for me (at least it keeps > debian/copyright simpler). > You shouldn't need to mess with debian/copyright, since GPL license is included in the system and you'll only need to refer to the file. I don't see this as a strong argument. Anyway, I've changed my mind and let be LGPL. > Most other po files that have a clear copyright statement contain > something like "This file is distributed under the same license as the > nss-ldapd package." > > Also, while nitpicking: "the GNU GPL license" should probably be "the > GNU GPL" or "the GNU General Public License; either version 2, or (at > your option) any later version." > I'm afraid those both refer to the same. And actually this is common on other quotes to the GPL. I'm attaching the updated file. Sorry for the delay. regards -- Rudy Godoy | 0x3433BD21 | http://www.htu.com.pe ,''`. http://www.apesol.org - http://www.debian.org : :' : GPG FP: 0D12 8537 607E 2DF5 4EFB 35A7 550F 1A00 3433 BD21 `. `' `-
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
