On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:53:58AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Presently, we want to restrict the commercial use of the Russian > translation. It means that the text is not BSD-licensed, and cannot be > freely included in any commercial products. Magnus, do you consider this > acceptable in the sense of your comments? > > > > I don't have a problem with such restrictions, but I think it would be good to > clarify what it exactly means. > > For example, can a russian speaker use the documentation if he's giving > postgresql training? Does it make a difference if he prints the documentation > and uses it vs uses it online?
Uh, I think we need to step back here. First, anyone can add a more restrictive copyright to our docs, even in English, as long as they retain our copyright notice.
Second, the website has been updated as requested.
However, I don't know what a "commercial purposes" restriction means. It is vague for software use, and even vaguer for documentation.
I understand Postgres Pro had to invest resources to do the translation, and understand their desire to restrict access. However, I think we need to be clear on exactly what those restrictions are if we are going to keep a link from our website.
We are not. We are already linking, that part is taken care of. As a general rule I think it'd be good if these things are clarified for visitors there though, but that's independent of us linking to it.
And actually, I think the web changes haven't been made. We had an example that looks great. Or is it that we should update the link to point to the new suggested url (adding the postgresql suffix)? I sort of lost track of that part, but that should be an easy fix if that's going to be a permanent URL.