Relicensing pt_BR translation file

[TK Soh]

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Adrian Buehlmann <adrian at cadifra.com> wrote:
> On 09.10.2009 09:52, TK Soh wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Adrian Buehlmann <adrian at cadifra.com> wrote:
>>> On 09.10.2009 02:31, Wagner Bruna wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> We (Diego Oliveira and me) relicensed our pt_BR translation work as
>>>> 3-clause BSD, for the benefit of the TortoiseHg translation¹. Would it
>>>> be possible (and desirable) for the Mercurial project to distribute
>>>> its i18n/pt_BR.po file (or, more precisely, its Brazilian Portuguese
>>>> strings) as 3-clause BSD (therefore including future contributions)?
>>>>
>>>> If so, I'll send a patch to add the licensing terms to the beginning
>>>> of that file.
>>>>
>>> (Sorry for asking possibly stupid questions but I would like to
>>> understand licensing if I contribute to a project)
>>>
>>> I admit I have only contributed to the code side of TortoiseHg
>>> (no translations), but my current understanding is that TortoiseHg is
>>> licensed under GPL version 2.
>>
>> TortoiseHg is a derivative work from Mercurial (it uses Mercurial
>> API), so it follows what Mercurial say it is.
>
> That is my understanding as well.
>
> Actually, TortoiseHg is a derived work of multiple other projects,
> as parts of other GPL'ed projects (not just Mercurial) have been
> taken into TortoiseHg.

Good point.

> But Mercurial is surely the most important part here, as
> TortoiseHg is using it's python API directly, which falls
> under the linking restrictions of Mercurial's license.
>
> But that does not answer my question. Why does Wagner say
> BSD is needed for TortoiseHg translation? I don't get that
> part...
>
>>> I don't understand why BSD should be needed for TortoiseHg then?
>>>
>>> Actually, BSD is incompatible with the license of TortoiseHg.
>