This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 1/3] localedata: use same comment_char/escape_char in these files
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Marko Myllynen <myllynen at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:20:08 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] localedata: use same comment_char/escape_char in these files
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1455954855-26431-1-git-send-email-vapier at gentoo dot org> <20160225201222 dot GK19841 at vapier dot lan> <20160309222439 dot GZ6588 at vapier dot lan> <56E29E8F dot 50209 at redhat dot com>
On 03/11/2016 05:31 AM, Marko Myllynen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2016-03-10 00:24, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On 25 Feb 2016 15:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> ping this series ...
>>
>> ping some more ...
>
> I think the silence here underlines once again that we simply don't have
> enough "resources" in this area when a trivial change doesn't get a
> timely review even when the patch is straightforward. Meaning that if we
> want to keep the actual locale data in glibc in proper shape, using CLDR
> is the only realistic and sustainable way forward.
Agreed.
> Carlos and Florian exchanged few emails about CLDR/Unicode/glibc locale
> copyright status, was there still something to be clarified on that front?
I have sent the FSF legal an email requesting clarification on the type
of attribution we need to provide, if any, for using CLDR/Unicode data
in the project. This has nothing to do with copyright status. The FSF does
not collect copyright on locales, so that's fine, but what's not fine is
what do *others* think and what do *others* require of us to comply to their
own interpretations.
I have not received any response from the FSF.
I have sent another email today.
--
Cheers,
Carlos.