This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 3/5] localedata: CLDRv28: update LC_ADDRESS.country_name translations
- From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>, Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
- Cc: Marko Myllynen <myllynen at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Keld Simonsen <keld at keldix dot com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:42:54 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] localedata: CLDRv28: update LC_ADDRESS.country_name translations
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1454998387-26905-1-git-send-email-vapier at gentoo dot org> <20160209061848 dot GE7732 at vapier dot lan> <20160209072042 dot GG7732 at vapier dot lan> <56B99471 dot 4000709 at redhat dot com> <20160209080011 dot GJ7732 at vapier dot lan> <56BA53A8 dot 2070704 at redhat dot com> <20160209214819 dot GR7732 at vapier dot lan> <56BB8DD6 dot 9020808 at redhat dot com> <20160210201256 dot GA7732 at vapier dot lan> <56BC0DC4 dot 3070404 at redhat dot com> <56BC534B dot 5040306 at redhat dot com> <56BCA2E9 dot 6010407 at redhat dot com>
On 02/11/2016 04:04 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 02/11/2016 04:24 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> On 02/11/2016 05:27 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>> On 02/10/2016 03:12 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>> then it would be obvious what version of CLDR was used to update the
>>>> locale. the downside is that the file isn't 100% sourced from CLDR,
>>>> so it seems like clobbering all the fields is wrong ?
>>> Per FSF statement  the locale files are not copyrightable so IMO
>>> attribution matters only so much as we care to thank the previous
>>> authors for their work. Such previous authors already have attribution
>>> in the Changelog, and IMO need not have any more attribution in the
>>> source file, just like we don't use "Contributed by" anymore.
>> unicode.org claims copyright on CLDR data:
>> The terms do not appear to be too onerous, but I would recommend to
>> obtain FSF (and internal) sign-off before incorporating data directly
>> from CLDR into glibc.
> Does this position not make it clear?
It deals with a different question. The FSF apparently disclaims
copyright ownership of the glibc locale data. It does not actually say
whether aggregated locale data can be the subject of a sui generis
database right (a question which the FSF would not have any say in
anyway), or if the FSF claims such rights on the glibc locale data
(probably not, but the message and permission notice do not say so