cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Soref <jso...@blackberry.com>
Subject Re: Apache Cordova "Translated using Microsoft Bing Translation"...
Date Thu, 29 May 2014 23:42:19 GMT
Mark Thomas wrote:
>I hate to rain on your parade but any restriction on how the result is
>used that goes further than the (very few) restrictions in the ALv2
>means that the result it can't be licensed under the ALv2 and that will
>cause problems.

OK, let's assume that the problem is that we may have naïvely selected an
Apache license for documentation. In general, my opinion is that source
code licenses are really never the right answer for documentation.

Strawman: we replace any/all documentation we have (if the original
authors of such documentation feel it does, we can invite them to offer to
relicense such content, otherwise, we can start from scratch, various
companies contributing to this project pay for documentation writers, so
this is ok) with MIT/X11/BSD licensed documentation.

If we do that,
1. am I right in understanding that per
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html Apache will not complain about our
baseline license for this documentation? [which we would host / develop @
Apache]
2. Can we then let 
<insert-random-translation-engine-with-perfectly-reasonable-non-compete-cla
use> help us maintain translations? The non-compete clause should have
zero incompatibilities with MIT/X11/BSD.

3. Note: for the purposes of ensuring that these files do not get anyone
upset, I propose that they not be hosted by Apache (my understanding is
that we're hosting them @
<arbitrary-translation-hosting-service-of-the-day-currently-crowdin.net>
anyway), since I'm pretty sure that if we asked Apache to host them,
Apache would get annoyed. That's perfectly fine with me.
4. If we need an additional repository host for the translations beyond
the 
<arbitrary-translation-hosting-service-of-the-day-currently-crowdin.net>,
we can use github/<arbitrary-repository-hosting-service>

Are there any further complaints to this straw man, or can we go back to
the business of producing <software, documentation, products for people to
use>?

Note: I am not writing this message on behalf of anyone else.

I don't really care if we use a machine translation service or not.
I don't really care if we use my localization tool or not.
I don't really care who we use for hosting.

I do really not want to see people say "you can't do that" without
suggesting "perhaps you have the wrong starting point, if you make this
change to your starting point, you could do that". If you want to play
lawyer-on-the-internet, please do everyone the favor of acting like a
lawyer and offering a constructive suggestion.

Mime
View raw message