[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy/po when_free_software_isnt_pract...
|
From: |
Pavel Kharitonov |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy/po when_free_software_isnt_pract... |
|
Date: |
Mon, 16 Mar 2015 18:16:40 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Pavel Kharitonov <ineiev> 15/03/16 18:16:40
Removed files:
philosophy/po :
when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.fr-en.html
when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.pot
when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru-en.html
when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru.po
when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.translist
Log message:
Remove spurious files.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.fr-en.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=0
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.pot?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=0
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru-en.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=0
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru.po?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=0
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.translist?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=0
Patches:
Index: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.fr-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.fr-en.html
diff -N when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.fr-en.html
--- when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.fr-en.html 16 Mar 2015
15:59:38 -0000 1.1
+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
@@ -1,187 +0,0 @@
-<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
-<title> When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better - GNU Project - Free
Software Foundation</title>
-<!--#include
virtual="/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.translist"
-->
-<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
-<h2> When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better</h2>
-
-<p>The Open Source Initiative's mission statement reads, “Open source
-is a development method for software that harnesses the power of
-distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of
-open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility,
-lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in.”</p>
-
-<p>For more than a decade now, the Free Software Foundation has argued
-against this “open source” characterization of the free software
-movement. Free software advocates have primarily argued against this
-framing because “open source” is an explicit effort to deemphasize
-our core message of freedom and obscure our movement's role in the
-success of the software we have built. We have argued that “open
-source” is bad, fundamentally, because it attempts to keep people from
-talking about software freedom. But there is another reason we should
-be wary of the open source framing. The fundamental open source
-argument, as quoted in the mission statement above, is often
-incorrect.</p>
-
-<p>Although the Open Source Initiative suggests “the promise of open
-source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility,” this
-promise is not always realized. Although we do not often advertise the
-fact, any user of an early-stage free software project can explain
-that free software is not always as convenient, in purely practical
-terms, as its proprietary competitors. Free software is sometimes low
-quality. It is sometimes unreliable. It is sometimes inflexible. If
-people take the arguments in favor of open source seriously, they must
-explain why open source has not lived up to its “promise” and
conclude
-that proprietary tools would be a better choice. There is no reason we
-should have to do either.</p>
-
-<p>Richard Stallman speaks to this in his article on <a
-href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">Why
-Open Source Misses the Point</a> when he explains, “The idea of open
-source is that allowing users to change and redistribute the software
-will make it more powerful and reliable. But this is not
-guaranteed. Developers of proprietary software are not necessarily
-incompetent. Sometimes they produce a program that is powerful and
-reliable, even though it does not respect the users' freedom.”</p>
-
-<p>For open source, poor-quality software is a problem to be explained
-away or a reason to eschew the software altogether. For free software,
-it is a problem to be worked through. For free software advocates,
-glitches and missing features are never a source of shame.
-Any piece of free software that respects users' freedom has a strong
-inherent advantage over a proprietary competitor that does not. Even
-if it has other issues, free software always has freedom.</p>
-
-<p>Of course, every piece of free software must start somewhere. A brand-new
-piece of software, for example, is unlikely to be more featureful
-than an established proprietary tool. Projects
-begin with many bugs and improve over time. While open
-source advocates might argue that a project will grow into usefulness
-over time and with luck, free software projects represent important
-contributions on day one to a free software advocate. Every piece of
-software that gives users control over their technology is a step
-forward. Improved quality as a project matures is the icing on the
-cake.</p>
-
-<p>A second, perhaps even more damning, fact is that the collaborative,
-distributed, peer-review development process at the heart of the
-definition of open source bears little resemblance to the practice of
-software development in the vast majority of projects under free (or
-“open source”) licenses.</p>
-
-<p>Several academic studies of free software hosting sites <a
-href="http://sf.net";>SourceForge</a> and <a
-href="http://sv.gnu.org";>Savannah</a> have shown what many free
-software developers who have put a codebase online already know
-first-hand. The vast majority of free software projects are not
-particularly collaborative. The median number of contributors to a
-free software project on SourceForge? One. A lone
-developer. SourceForge projects at the ninety-fifth percentile by
-participant size have only five contributors. More than half of these
-free software projects—and even most projects that have made several
-successful releases and been downloaded frequently, are the work of a
-single developer with little outside help.</p>
-
-<p>By emphasizing the power of collaborative development and “distributed
-peer review,” open source approaches seem to have very little to say
-about why one should use, or contribute to, the vast majority of free
-software projects. Because the purported benefits of collaboration
-cannot be realized when there is no collaboration, the vast majority
-of free development projects are at no technical advantage with respect to a
-proprietary competitor.</p>
-
-<p>For free software advocates, these same projects are each seen as
-important successes. Because every piece of free software respects its
-users' freedom, advocates of software freedom argue that each piece of
-free software begins with an inherent ethical advantage over
-proprietary competitors—even a more featureful one. By emphasizing
-freedom over practical advantages, free software's advocacy is rooted
-in a technical reality in a way that open source is often not. When
-free software is better, we can celebrate this fact. When it is not,
-we need not treat it as a damning critique of free software advocacy
-or even as a compelling argument against the use of the software in
-question.</p>
-
-<p>Open source advocates must defend their thesis that freely developed
-software should, or will with time, be better than proprietary
-software. Free software supporters can instead ask, “How can we make
-free software better?” In a free software framing, high quality software
-exists as a means to an end rather than an end itself. Free software
-developers should strive to create functional, flexible software that
-serves its users well. But doing so is not the only way to make steps
-toward solving what is both an easier and a much more profoundly
-important goal: respecting and protecting their freedom.</p>
-
-<p>Of course, we do not need to reject arguments that collaboration can
-play an important role in creating high-quality software. In many of
-the most successful free software projects, it clearly has done
-exactly that. The benefits of collaboration become something to
-understand, support, and work towards, rather than something to take
-for granted in the face of evidence that refuses to conform to
-ideology.</p>
-
-</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
-<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
-<div id="footer">
-<div class="unprintable">
-
-<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
-There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
-the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
-to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.</p>
-
-<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
- replace it with the translation of these two:
-
- We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
- translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
- Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
- to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>
- <address@hidden></a>.</p>
-
- <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
- our web pages, see <a
- href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
- README</a>. -->
-Please see the <a
-href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
-README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
-of this article.</p>
-</div>
-
-<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
- files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
- be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this
- without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
- document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
- document was modified, or published.
-
- If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
- Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
- years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
- year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
- being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
-
- There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
- Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
-
-<p>Copyright © 1999-2011 Benjamin Mako Hill</p>
-
-<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
-href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/";>Creative
-Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
-
-<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
-
-<p class="unprintable">Updated:
-<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2015/03/16 15:59:38 $
-<!-- timestamp end -->
-</p>
-</div>
-</div>
-</body>
-</html>
-
Index: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.pot
===================================================================
RCS file: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.pot
diff -N when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.pot
--- when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.pot 16 Mar 2015 15:59:39
-0000 1.1
+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
@@ -1,227 +0,0 @@
-# LANGUAGE translation of
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.html
-# Copyright (C) YEAR Free Software Foundation, Inc.
-# This file is distributed under the same license as the original article.
-# FIRST AUTHOR <address@hidden>, YEAR.
-#
-#, fuzzy
-msgid ""
-msgstr ""
-"Project-Id-Version: when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.html\n"
-"POT-Creation-Date: 2014-03-14 04:36+0000\n"
-"PO-Revision-Date: YEAR-MO-DA HO:MI+ZONE\n"
-"Last-Translator: FULL NAME <address@hidden>\n"
-"Language-Team: LANGUAGE <address@hidden>\n"
-"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
-"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=CHARSET\n"
-"Content-Transfer-Encoding: ENCODING"
-
-#. type: Content of: <title>
-msgid ""
-"When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better - GNU Project - Free Software "
-"Foundation"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <h2>
-msgid "When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"The Open Source Initiative's mission statement reads, “Open source is "
-"a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed "
-"peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is "
-"better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end "
-"to predatory vendor lock-in.”"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"For more than a decade now, the Free Software Foundation has argued against "
-"this “open source” characterization of the free software "
-"movement. Free software advocates have primarily argued against this framing "
-"because “open source” is an explicit effort to deemphasize our "
-"core message of freedom and obscure our movement's role in the success of "
-"the software we have built. We have argued that “open source” is "
-"bad, fundamentally, because it attempts to keep people from talking about "
-"software freedom. But there is another reason we should be wary of the open "
-"source framing. The fundamental open source argument, as quoted in the "
-"mission statement above, is often incorrect."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Although the Open Source Initiative suggests “the promise of open "
-"source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility,” this "
-"promise is not always realized. Although we do not often advertise the fact, "
-"any user of an early-stage free software project can explain that free "
-"software is not always as convenient, in purely practical terms, as its "
-"proprietary competitors. Free software is sometimes low quality. It is "
-"sometimes unreliable. It is sometimes inflexible. If people take the "
-"arguments in favor of open source seriously, they must explain why open "
-"source has not lived up to its “promise” and conclude that "
-"proprietary tools would be a better choice. There is no reason we should "
-"have to do either."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Richard Stallman speaks to this in his article on <a "
-"href=\"/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html\">Why Open Source "
-"Misses the Point</a> when he explains, “The idea of open source is "
-"that allowing users to change and redistribute the software will make it "
-"more powerful and reliable. But this is not guaranteed. Developers of "
-"proprietary software are not necessarily incompetent. Sometimes they produce "
-"a program that is powerful and reliable, even though it does not respect the "
-"users' freedom.”"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"For open source, poor-quality software is a problem to be explained away or "
-"a reason to eschew the software altogether. For free software, it is a "
-"problem to be worked through. For free software advocates, glitches and "
-"missing features are never a source of shame. Any piece of free software "
-"that respects users' freedom has a strong inherent advantage over a "
-"proprietary competitor that does not. Even if it has other issues, free "
-"software always has freedom."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Of course, every piece of free software must start somewhere. A brand-new "
-"piece of software, for example, is unlikely to be more featureful than an "
-"established proprietary tool. Projects begin with many bugs and improve over "
-"time. While open source advocates might argue that a project will grow into "
-"usefulness over time and with luck, free software projects represent "
-"important contributions on day one to a free software advocate. Every piece "
-"of software that gives users control over their technology is a step "
-"forward. Improved quality as a project matures is the icing on the cake."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"A second, perhaps even more damning, fact is that the collaborative, "
-"distributed, peer-review development process at the heart of the definition "
-"of open source bears little resemblance to the practice of software "
-"development in the vast majority of projects under free (or “open "
-"source”) licenses."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Several academic studies of free software hosting sites <a "
-"href=\"http://sf.net\";>SourceForge</a> and <a "
-"href=\"http://sv.gnu.org\";>Savannah</a> have shown what many free software "
-"developers who have put a codebase online already know first-hand. The vast "
-"majority of free software projects are not particularly collaborative. The "
-"median number of contributors to a free software project on SourceForge? "
-"One. A lone developer. SourceForge projects at the ninety-fifth percentile "
-"by participant size have only five contributors. More than half of these "
-"free software projects—and even most projects that have made several "
-"successful releases and been downloaded frequently, are the work of a single "
-"developer with little outside help."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"By emphasizing the power of collaborative development and “distributed "
-"peer review,” open source approaches seem to have very little to say "
-"about why one should use, or contribute to, the vast majority of free "
-"software projects. Because the purported benefits of collaboration cannot be "
-"realized when there is no collaboration, the vast majority of free "
-"development projects are at no technical advantage with respect to a "
-"proprietary competitor."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"For free software advocates, these same projects are each seen as important "
-"successes. Because every piece of free software respects its users' freedom, "
-"advocates of software freedom argue that each piece of free software begins "
-"with an inherent ethical advantage over proprietary competitors—even a "
-"more featureful one. By emphasizing freedom over practical advantages, free "
-"software's advocacy is rooted in a technical reality in a way that open "
-"source is often not. When free software is better, we can celebrate this "
-"fact. When it is not, we need not treat it as a damning critique of free "
-"software advocacy or even as a compelling argument against the use of the "
-"software in question."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Open source advocates must defend their thesis that freely developed "
-"software should, or will with time, be better than proprietary "
-"software. Free software supporters can instead ask, “How can we make "
-"free software better?” In a free software framing, high quality "
-"software exists as a means to an end rather than an end itself. Free "
-"software developers should strive to create functional, flexible software "
-"that serves its users well. But doing so is not the only way to make steps "
-"toward solving what is both an easier and a much more profoundly important "
-"goal: respecting and protecting their freedom."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Of course, we do not need to reject arguments that collaboration can play an "
-"important role in creating high-quality software. In many of the most "
-"successful free software projects, it clearly has done exactly that. The "
-"benefits of collaboration become something to understand, support, and work "
-"towards, rather than something to take for granted in the face of evidence "
-"that refuses to conform to ideology."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes.
-#. type: Content of: <div>
-msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S NOTES*"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <div><div><p>
-msgid ""
-"Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to <a "
-"href=\"mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>. There are also <a "
-"href=\"/contact/\">other ways to contact</a> the FSF. Broken links and "
-"other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a "
-"href=\"mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
-#. replace it with the translation of these two:
-#
-#. We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
-#. translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
-#. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
-#. to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>
-#
-#. <address@hidden></a>.</p>
-#
-#. <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
-#. our web pages, see <a
-#. href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
-#. README</a>.
-#. type: Content of: <div><div><p>
-msgid ""
-"Please see the <a "
-"href=\"/server/standards/README.translations.html\">Translations README</a> "
-"for information on coordinating and submitting translations of this article."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <div><p>
-msgid "Copyright © 1999-2011 Benjamin Mako Hill"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. type: Content of: <div><p>
-msgid ""
-"This page is licensed under a <a rel=\"license\" "
-"href=\"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/\";>Creative Commons "
-"Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>."
-msgstr ""
-
-#. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.
-#. type: Content of: <div><div>
-msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*"
-msgstr ""
-
-#. timestamp start
-#. type: Content of: <div><p>
-msgid "Updated:"
-msgstr ""
Index: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru-en.html
diff -N when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru-en.html
--- when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru-en.html 16 Mar 2015
15:59:39 -0000 1.1
+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
@@ -1,187 +0,0 @@
-<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
-<title> When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better - GNU Project - Free
Software Foundation</title>
-<!--#include
virtual="/philosophy/po/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.translist"
-->
-<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
-<h2> When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better</h2>
-
-<p>The Open Source Initiative's mission statement reads, “Open source
-is a development method for software that harnesses the power of
-distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of
-open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility,
-lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in.”</p>
-
-<p>For more than a decade now, the Free Software Foundation has argued
-against this “open source” characterization of the free software
-movement. Free software advocates have primarily argued against this
-framing because “open source” is an explicit effort to deemphasize
-our core message of freedom and obscure our movement's role in the
-success of the software we have built. We have argued that “open
-source” is bad, fundamentally, because it attempts to keep people from
-talking about software freedom. But there is another reason we should
-be wary of the open source framing. The fundamental open source
-argument, as quoted in the mission statement above, is often
-incorrect.</p>
-
-<p>Although the Open Source Initiative suggests “the promise of open
-source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility,” this
-promise is not always realized. Although we do not often advertise the
-fact, any user of an early-stage free software project can explain
-that free software is not always as convenient, in purely practical
-terms, as its proprietary competitors. Free software is sometimes low
-quality. It is sometimes unreliable. It is sometimes inflexible. If
-people take the arguments in favor of open source seriously, they must
-explain why open source has not lived up to its “promise” and
conclude
-that proprietary tools would be a better choice. There is no reason we
-should have to do either.</p>
-
-<p>Richard Stallman speaks to this in his article on <a
-href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">Why
-Open Source Misses the Point</a> when he explains, “The idea of open
-source is that allowing users to change and redistribute the software
-will make it more powerful and reliable. But this is not
-guaranteed. Developers of proprietary software are not necessarily
-incompetent. Sometimes they produce a program that is powerful and
-reliable, even though it does not respect the users' freedom.”</p>
-
-<p>For open source, poor-quality software is a problem to be explained
-away or a reason to eschew the software altogether. For free software,
-it is a problem to be worked through. For free software advocates,
-glitches and missing features are never a source of shame.
-Any piece of free software that respects users' freedom has a strong
-inherent advantage over a proprietary competitor that does not. Even
-if it has other issues, free software always has freedom.</p>
-
-<p>Of course, every piece of free software must start somewhere. A brand-new
-piece of software, for example, is unlikely to be more featureful
-than an established proprietary tool. Projects
-begin with many bugs and improve over time. While open
-source advocates might argue that a project will grow into usefulness
-over time and with luck, free software projects represent important
-contributions on day one to a free software advocate. Every piece of
-software that gives users control over their technology is a step
-forward. Improved quality as a project matures is the icing on the
-cake.</p>
-
-<p>A second, perhaps even more damning, fact is that the collaborative,
-distributed, peer-review development process at the heart of the
-definition of open source bears little resemblance to the practice of
-software development in the vast majority of projects under free (or
-“open source”) licenses.</p>
-
-<p>Several academic studies of free software hosting sites <a
-href="http://sf.net";>SourceForge</a> and <a
-href="http://sv.gnu.org";>Savannah</a> have shown what many free
-software developers who have put a codebase online already know
-first-hand. The vast majority of free software projects are not
-particularly collaborative. The median number of contributors to a
-free software project on SourceForge? One. A lone
-developer. SourceForge projects at the ninety-fifth percentile by
-participant size have only five contributors. More than half of these
-free software projects—and even most projects that have made several
-successful releases and been downloaded frequently, are the work of a
-single developer with little outside help.</p>
-
-<p>By emphasizing the power of collaborative development and “distributed
-peer review,” open source approaches seem to have very little to say
-about why one should use, or contribute to, the vast majority of free
-software projects. Because the purported benefits of collaboration
-cannot be realized when there is no collaboration, the vast majority
-of free development projects are at no technical advantage with respect to a
-proprietary competitor.</p>
-
-<p>For free software advocates, these same projects are each seen as
-important successes. Because every piece of free software respects its
-users' freedom, advocates of software freedom argue that each piece of
-free software begins with an inherent ethical advantage over
-proprietary competitors—even a more featureful one. By emphasizing
-freedom over practical advantages, free software's advocacy is rooted
-in a technical reality in a way that open source is often not. When
-free software is better, we can celebrate this fact. When it is not,
-we need not treat it as a damning critique of free software advocacy
-or even as a compelling argument against the use of the software in
-question.</p>
-
-<p>Open source advocates must defend their thesis that freely developed
-software should, or will with time, be better than proprietary
-software. Free software supporters can instead ask, “How can we make
-free software better?” In a free software framing, high quality software
-exists as a means to an end rather than an end itself. Free software
-developers should strive to create functional, flexible software that
-serves its users well. But doing so is not the only way to make steps
-toward solving what is both an easier and a much more profoundly
-important goal: respecting and protecting their freedom.</p>
-
-<p>Of course, we do not need to reject arguments that collaboration can
-play an important role in creating high-quality software. In many of
-the most successful free software projects, it clearly has done
-exactly that. The benefits of collaboration become something to
-understand, support, and work towards, rather than something to take
-for granted in the face of evidence that refuses to conform to
-ideology.</p>
-
-</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
-<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
-<div id="footer">
-<div class="unprintable">
-
-<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
-There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
-the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
-to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.</p>
-
-<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
- replace it with the translation of these two:
-
- We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
- translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
- Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
- to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>
- <address@hidden></a>.</p>
-
- <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
- our web pages, see <a
- href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
- README</a>. -->
-Please see the <a
-href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
-README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
-of this article.</p>
-</div>
-
-<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
- files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
- be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this
- without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
- document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
- document was modified, or published.
-
- If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
- Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
- years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
- year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
- being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
-
- There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
- Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
-
-<p>Copyright © 1999-2011 Benjamin Mako Hill</p>
-
-<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
-href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/";>Creative
-Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
-
-<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
-
-<p class="unprintable">Updated:
-<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2015/03/16 15:59:39 $
-<!-- timestamp end -->
-</p>
-</div>
-</div>
-</body>
-</html>
-
Index: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru.po
===================================================================
RCS file: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru.po
diff -N when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru.po
--- when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.ru.po 16 Mar 2015 15:59:38
-0000 1.1
+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
@@ -1,363 +0,0 @@
-# Russian translation of
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.html
-# Copyright (C) 1999-2011 Benjamin Mako Hill
-# Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc. (translation)
-# This file is distributed under the same license as the original article.
-# Ineiev <address@hidden>, 2013
-# this translation lacks appropriate review
-#
-msgid ""
-msgstr ""
-"Project-Id-Version: when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.html\n"
-"POT-Creation-Date: 2014-03-14 04:36+0000\n"
-"PO-Revision-Date: 2013-01-28 17:17+0000\n"
-"Last-Translator: Ineiev <address@hidden>\n"
-"Language-Team: Russian <address@hidden>\n"
-"Language: ru\n"
-"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
-"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
-"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
-
-#. type: Content of: <title>
-msgid ""
-"When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better - GNU Project - Free Software "
-"Foundation"
-msgstr ""
-"Ðогда ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамма (пÑакÑиÑеÑки)
не лÑÑÑе - ÐÑÐ¾ÐµÐºÑ GNU - Фонд "
-"Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного обеÑпеÑениÑ"
-
-#. type: Content of: <h2>
-msgid "When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Better"
-msgstr "Ðогда ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамма
(пÑакÑиÑеÑки) не лÑÑÑе"
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"The Open Source Initiative's mission statement reads, “Open source is "
-"a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed "
-"peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is "
-"better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end "
-"to predatory vendor lock-in.”"
-msgstr ""
-"ÐаÑвление о задаÑаÑ
ÐниÑиаÑÐ¸Ð²Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑого
иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа глаÑиÑ: “"
-"ÐÑкÑÑÑÑй иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ — меÑод
ÑазÑабоÑки пÑогÑамм, коÑоÑÑй "
-"обÑздÑÐ²Ð°ÐµÑ ÑнеÑÐ³Ð¸Ñ ÑаÑпÑеделеннÑÑ
взаимнÑÑ
пÑовеÑок и пÑозÑаÑноÑÑи пÑоÑеÑÑа.
"
-"ÐÑкÑÑÑÑй иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ Ð¾Ð±ÐµÑÐ°ÐµÑ Ð»ÑÑÑее
каÑеÑÑво, повÑÑеннÑÑ Ð½Ð°Ð´ÐµÐ¶Ð½Ð¾ÑÑÑ "
-"и гибкоÑÑÑ, более низкÑÑ ÑÑоимоÑÑÑ
и ÐºÐ¾Ð½ÐµÑ Ñ
иÑниÑеÑкого замÑÐºÐ°Ð½Ð¸Ñ "
-"на пÑоизводиÑеле”."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"For more than a decade now, the Free Software Foundation has argued against "
-"this “open source” characterization of the free software "
-"movement. Free software advocates have primarily argued against this framing "
-"because “open source” is an explicit effort to deemphasize our "
-"core message of freedom and obscure our movement's role in the success of "
-"the software we have built. We have argued that “open source” is "
-"bad, fundamentally, because it attempts to keep people from talking about "
-"software freedom. But there is another reason we should be wary of the open "
-"source framing. The fundamental open source argument, as quoted in the "
-"mission statement above, is often incorrect."
-msgstr ""
-"Уже более деÑÑÑилеÑÐ¸Ñ Ð¤Ð¾Ð½Ð´ Ñвободного
пÑогÑаммного обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¾ÑпаÑÐ¸Ð²Ð°ÐµÑ "
-"ÑÑо опиÑание Ð´Ð²Ð¸Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð·Ð° Ñвободное
пÑогÑаммное обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ñ ÑоÑки зÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ "
-"“оÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа”.
СÑоÑонники Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного "
-"обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð²Ð¾Ð·Ñажали пÑоÑив Ñакой
ÑоÑмÑлиÑовки пÑежде вÑего поÑомÑ, ÑÑо "
-"“оÑкÑÑÑÑй иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ” —
ÑÑо ÑÐ²Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð¿ÑÑка "
-"заÑÑÑеваÑÑ Ð½Ð°Ñе ÑенÑÑалÑное ÑообÑение о
Ñвободе и заÑениÑÑ ÑÐ¾Ð»Ñ Ð½Ð°Ñего "
-"Ð´Ð²Ð¸Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð² ÑÑпеÑ
е Ñого коÑпÑÑа пÑогÑамм,
коÑоÑÑй Ð¼Ñ Ð¿Ð¾ÑÑÑоили. ÐÑ Ð¿Ð¾ÑÑнÑли, "
-"ÑÑо вÑÑажение “оÑкÑÑÑÑй иÑÑ
однÑй
ÑекÑÑ” плоÑ
о в пÑинÑипе, поÑÐ¾Ð¼Ñ "
-"ÑÑо оно пÑÑаеÑÑÑ ÑдеÑжаÑÑ Ð»Ñдей оÑ
ÑазговоÑов о Ñвободе пÑогÑамм. Ðо еÑÑÑ Ð¸ "
-"дÑÑÐ³Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑиÑина, по коÑоÑой нам ÑледÑеÑ
опаÑаÑÑÑÑ ÑоÑмÑлиÑовок оÑкÑÑÑого "
-"иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа. ÐÑновополагаÑÑий
аÑгÑÐ¼ÐµÐ½Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа, "
-"пÑоÑиÑиÑованнÑй вÑÑе из заÑÐ²Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¾
задаÑаÑ
, ÑаÑÑо невеÑен."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Although the Open Source Initiative suggests “the promise of open "
-"source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility,” this "
-"promise is not always realized. Although we do not often advertise the fact, "
-"any user of an early-stage free software project can explain that free "
-"software is not always as convenient, in purely practical terms, as its "
-"proprietary competitors. Free software is sometimes low quality. It is "
-"sometimes unreliable. It is sometimes inflexible. If people take the "
-"arguments in favor of open source seriously, they must explain why open "
-"source has not lived up to its “promise” and conclude that "
-"proprietary tools would be a better choice. There is no reason we should "
-"have to do either."
-msgstr ""
-"ХоÑÑ ÐниÑиаÑива оÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного
ÑекÑÑа пÑедполагаеÑ, ÑÑо “оÑкÑÑÑÑй "
-"иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ Ð¾Ð±ÐµÑÐ°ÐµÑ Ð»ÑÑÑее каÑеÑÑво,
повÑÑеннÑÑ Ð½Ð°Ð´ÐµÐ¶Ð½Ð¾ÑÑÑ Ð¸ "
-"гибкоÑÑÑ”, ÑÑо обеÑание не вÑегда
ÑеализÑеÑÑÑ. ХоÑÑ Ð¼Ñ Ð½Ðµ ÑаÑÑо "
-"обÑаÑаем внимание на ÑÑÐ¾Ñ ÑакÑ, лÑбой
полÑзоваÑÐµÐ»Ñ Ð¿ÑоекÑа по ÑÐ¾Ð·Ð´Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ "
-"ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм, наÑ
одÑÑегоÑÑ Ð² Ñанней
ÑÑадии, ÑÐºÐ°Ð¶ÐµÑ Ð²Ð°Ð¼, ÑÑо ÑвободнÑе "
-"пÑогÑÐ°Ð¼Ð¼Ñ Ð½Ðµ вÑегда Ñак же ÑдобнÑ, Ñ ÑиÑÑо
пÑакÑиÑеÑкой ÑоÑки зÑениÑ, как иÑ
"
-"неÑвободнÑе конкÑÑенÑÑ. ÐаÑеÑÑво
ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм иногда низко. Ðногда
они "
-"ненадежнÑ. Ðногда они негибки. ÐÑли лÑди
ÑеÑÑезно оÑноÑÑÑÑÑ Ðº аÑгÑменÑам в "
-"полÑÐ·Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа, они
Ð´Ð¾Ð»Ð¶Ð½Ñ Ð¾Ð±ÑÑÑниÑÑ, поÑÐµÐ¼Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑÑй "
-"иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ Ð½Ðµ вÑполнил Ñвоего
“обеÑаниє и ÑделаÑÑ Ð²Ñвод, "
-"ÑÑо неÑвободнÑе ÑÑедÑÑва бÑли Ð±Ñ Ð»ÑÑÑим
вÑбоÑом. Ðам не нÑжно делаÑÑ Ð½Ð¸ "
-"Ñого, ни дÑÑгого."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Richard Stallman speaks to this in his article on <a href=\"/philosophy/open-"
-"source-misses-the-point.html\">Why Open Source Misses the Point</a> when he "
-"explains, “The idea of open source is that allowing users to change "
-"and redistribute the software will make it more powerful and reliable. But "
-"this is not guaranteed. Developers of proprietary software are not "
-"necessarily incompetent. Sometimes they produce a program that is powerful "
-"and reliable, even though it does not respect the users' freedom.”"
-msgstr ""
-"РиÑаÑд СÑолмен говоÑÐ¸Ñ Ð¾Ð± ÑÑом в Ñвоей
ÑÑаÑÑе “<a href=\"/philosophy/"
-"open-source-misses-the-point.html\">ÐоÑÐµÐ¼Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑÑй иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ Ð½Ðµ "
-"пеÑÐµÐ´Ð°ÐµÑ Ð¿Ð¾Ð½ÑÑÐ¸Ñ ‘ÑвободнаÑ
пÑогÑамма’</a>”, когда он "
-"поÑÑнÑеÑ: “ÐÐ´ÐµÑ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного
ÑекÑÑа ÑоÑÑÐ¾Ð¸Ñ Ð² Ñом, ÑÑо "
-"ÑазÑеÑение полÑзоваÑелÑм изменÑÑÑ Ð¸
ÑаÑпÑоÑÑÑанÑÑÑ Ð¿ÑогÑÐ°Ð¼Ð¼Ñ ÑÐ´ÐµÐ»Ð°ÐµÑ Ð¸Ñ
"
-"ÑÑÑекÑивнее и надежнее. Ðо ÑÑо не
гаÑанÑиÑовано. РазÑабоÑÑики неÑвободнÑÑ
"
-"пÑогÑамм не обÑзаÑелÑно некомпеÑенÑнÑ.
Ðногда они вÑпÑÑкаÑÑ Ð¿ÑогÑаммÑ, "
-"коÑоÑÐ°Ñ ÑÑÑекÑивна и надежна, Ñ
оÑÑ Ð¾Ð½Ð° и
не ÑÐ²Ð°Ð¶Ð°ÐµÑ ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ñ "
-"полÑзоваÑелей”."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"For open source, poor-quality software is a problem to be explained away or "
-"a reason to eschew the software altogether. For free software, it is a "
-"problem to be worked through. For free software advocates, glitches and "
-"missing features are never a source of shame. Any piece of free software "
-"that respects users' freedom has a strong inherent advantage over a "
-"proprietary competitor that does not. Even if it has other issues, free "
-"software always has freedom."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐÐ»Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа
низкокаÑеÑÑвеннÑе пÑогÑÐ°Ð¼Ð¼Ñ — "
-"пÑоблема, коÑоÑÑÑ ÑледÑÐµÑ ÑазÑÑÑниÑÑ, или
пÑиÑина ÑÑоÑониÑÑÑÑ ÑÑиÑ
пÑогÑамм "
-"вообÑе. ÐÐ»Ñ ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм ÑÑо
пÑоблема, над коÑоÑой ÑледÑÐµÑ ÑабоÑаÑÑ. "
-"ÐÐ»Ñ ÑÑоÑонников Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного
обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¿ÑоÑеÑ
и и недоÑÑаÑÑие "
-"возможноÑÑи никогда не ÑÑанÑÑ Ð¿ÑиÑиной
Ð´Ð»Ñ ÑÑÑда. У лÑбой Ñвободной "
-"пÑогÑаммÑ, ÑважаÑÑей ÑвободÑ
полÑзоваÑелей, еÑÑÑ ÑилÑное и неоÑÑемлемое
"
-"пÑеимÑÑеÑÑво пеÑед неÑвободнÑм
конкÑÑенÑом, коÑоÑÑй ÑвободÑ
полÑзоваÑелей не "
-"ÑважаеÑ. Ðаже еÑли Ñ Ñвободной пÑогÑаммÑ
Ð½ÐµÑ Ñего-Ñо еÑе, Ñ Ð½ÐµÐµ вÑегда еÑÑÑ "
-"Ñвобода."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Of course, every piece of free software must start somewhere. A brand-new "
-"piece of software, for example, is unlikely to be more featureful than an "
-"established proprietary tool. Projects begin with many bugs and improve over "
-"time. While open source advocates might argue that a project will grow into "
-"usefulness over time and with luck, free software projects represent "
-"important contributions on day one to a free software advocate. Every piece "
-"of software that gives users control over their technology is a step "
-"forward. Improved quality as a project matures is the icing on the cake."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐонеÑно, ÐºÐ°Ð¶Ð´Ð°Ñ ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамма
должна Ñ Ñего-Ñо наÑинаÑÑÑÑ. ÐапÑимеÑ, "
-"ÑолÑко ÑÑо возникÑÐ°Ñ ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамма
едва ли бÑÐ´ÐµÑ Ð±Ð¾Ð»ÐµÐµ богаÑа "
-"ÑÑнкÑиÑми, Ñем ÑазвиÑÑй неÑвободнÑй
пакеÑ. ÐÑоекÑÑ Ð½Ð°ÑинаÑÑÑÑ Ñ Ð±Ð¾Ð»ÑÑого "
-"колиÑеÑÑва оÑибок и ÑлÑÑÑаÑÑÑÑ Ñо
вÑеменем. Ð Ñо вÑÐµÐ¼Ñ ÐºÐ°Ðº ÑÑоÑонники "
-"оÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа могли бÑ
ÑбеждаÑÑ, ÑÑо Ñо вÑеменем и пÑи "
-"извеÑÑной доле Ð²ÐµÐ·ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¿ÑÐ¾ÐµÐºÑ Ð²ÑÑаÑÑÐµÑ Ð´Ð¾
полезного, Ð´Ð»Ñ ÑÑоÑонника "
-"ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм пÑоекÑÑ Ð¿Ð¾ ÑозданиÑ
ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм пÑедÑÑавлÑÑÑ Ñобой "
-"важнÑй вклад Ñ Ð¿ÐµÑвого же днÑ. ÐÑбаÑ
пÑогÑамма, коÑоÑÐ°Ñ Ð´Ð°ÐµÑ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»ÑзоваÑелÑм "
-"конÑÑÐ¾Ð»Ñ Ð½Ð°Ð´ иÑ
ÑеÑ
никой — ÑÑо Ñаг
впеÑед. ÐовÑÑенное каÑеÑÑво "
-"пÑи доÑÑижении пÑоекÑом зÑелоÑÑи —
ÑÑо маÑло на кÑÑке Ñ
леба."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"A second, perhaps even more damning, fact is that the collaborative, "
-"distributed, peer-review development process at the heart of the definition "
-"of open source bears little resemblance to the practice of software "
-"development in the vast majority of projects under free (or “open "
-"source”) licenses."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐÑоÑой, возможно, еÑе более вопиÑÑий ÑакÑ
заклÑÑаеÑÑÑ Ð² Ñом, ÑÑо "
-"ÑаÑпÑеделеннÑй пÑоÑеÑÑ ÑазÑабоÑки Ñ
ÑоÑÑÑдниÑеÑÑвом и взаимной пÑовеÑкой, "
-"коÑоÑÑй ÑоÑÑавлÑÐµÑ ÑеÑдÑе опÑеделениÑ
оÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа, Ð¸Ð¼ÐµÐµÑ Ð¼Ð°Ð»Ð¾ "
-"обÑего Ñ Ð¿ÑакÑикой ÑазÑабоÑки пÑогÑамм в
подавлÑÑÑем болÑÑинÑÑве пÑоекÑов "
-"под лиÑензиÑми ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм (или
пÑогÑамм “Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑÑм иÑÑ
однÑм "
-"ÑекÑÑом”)."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Several academic studies of free software hosting sites <a href=\"http://sf.";
-"net\">SourceForge</a> and <a href=\"http://sv.gnu.org\";>Savannah</a> have "
-"shown what many free software developers who have put a codebase online "
-"already know first-hand. The vast majority of free software projects are not "
-"particularly collaborative. The median number of contributors to a free "
-"software project on SourceForge? One. A lone developer. SourceForge projects "
-"at the ninety-fifth percentile by participant size have only five "
-"contributors. More than half of these free software projects—and even "
-"most projects that have made several successful releases and been downloaded "
-"frequently, are the work of a single developer with little outside help."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐеÑколÑко наÑÑнÑÑ
иÑÑледований ÑайÑов <a
href=\"http://sf.net\";>SourceForge</"
-"a> и <a href=\"http://sv.gnu.org\";>Savannah</a>,
пÑедоÑÑавлÑÑÑиÑ
"
-"инÑÑаÑÑÑÑкÑÑÑÑ Ð´Ð»Ñ ÑазÑабоÑки ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм, показали Ñо, ÑÑо многие "
-"ÑазÑабоÑÑики ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм, коÑоÑÑм
доводилоÑÑ ÑазмеÑаÑÑ ÑекÑÑÑ "
-"пÑогÑамм в ÐнÑеÑнеÑе, Ñже знаÑÑ Ð¿Ð¾
ÑобÑÑÐ²ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾Ð¼Ñ Ð¾Ð¿ÑÑÑ. ÐодавлÑÑÑее "
-"болÑÑинÑÑво пÑоекÑов по ÑазÑабоÑке
ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм не ÑлиÑком Ñклонно к "
-"ÑоÑÑÑдниÑеÑÑвÑ. Ðакова медиана
ÑоÑазÑабоÑÑиков пÑоекÑа по ÑозданиÑ
ÑвободнÑÑ
"
-"пÑогÑамм на SourceForge? Ðдин. Ðдинокий
ÑазÑабоÑÑик. РдевÑноÑÑа пÑÑи "
-"пÑоÑенÑаÑ
пÑоекÑов SourceForge ÑÑаÑÑвÑÐµÑ Ð½Ðµ
более пÑÑи ÑоÑазÑабоÑÑиков. "
-"Ðолее Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾Ð²Ð¸Ð½Ñ Ð¸Ð· ÑÑиÑ
пÑоекÑов по
ÑÐ¾Ð·Ð´Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм — "
-"и даже болÑÑинÑÑво пÑоекÑов, коÑоÑÑе
Ñделали неÑколÑко ÑÑпеÑнÑÑ
вÑпÑÑков и "
-"ÑÐ°Ð¹Ð»Ñ ÐºÐ¾ÑоÑÑÑ
ÑаÑÑо запÑаÑивалиÑÑ Ð¿Ð¾
ÑеÑи — пÑедÑÑавлÑÑÑ Ñобой "
-"ÑабоÑÑ ÐµÐ´Ð¸Ð½ÑÑвенного ÑазÑабоÑÑика
пÑакÑиÑеÑки без помоÑи Ñо ÑÑоÑонÑ."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"By emphasizing the power of collaborative development and “distributed "
-"peer review,” open source approaches seem to have very little to say "
-"about why one should use, or contribute to, the vast majority of free "
-"software projects. Because the purported benefits of collaboration cannot be "
-"realized when there is no collaboration, the vast majority of free "
-"development projects are at no technical advantage with respect to a "
-"proprietary competitor."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐодÑеÑÐºÐ¸Ð²Ð°Ñ ÑÑÑекÑивноÑÑÑ ÑовмеÑÑной
ÑазÑабоÑки и “ÑаÑпÑеделеннÑÑ
"
-"взаимнÑÑ
пÑовеÑок”, подÑ
Ð¾Ð´Ñ Ð¾ÑкÑÑÑого
иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа, кажеÑÑÑ, поÑÑи "
-"ниÑего не говоÑÑÑ Ð¾ Ñом, поÑÐµÐ¼Ñ ÐºÐ¾Ð¼Ñ-Ñо
ÑледÑÐµÑ Ð´ÐµÐ»Ð°ÑÑ Ð²ÐºÐ»Ð°Ð´ в подавлÑÑÑее "
-"болÑÑинÑÑво пÑоекÑов по ÑазÑабоÑке
ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм или полÑзоваÑÑÑÑ Ð¸Ð¼Ð¸. "
-"ÐоÑколÑÐºÑ Ð¿ÑедполагаемÑе вÑÐ³Ð¾Ð´Ñ Ð¾Ñ
ÑоÑÑÑдниÑеÑÑва не могÑÑ Ð±ÑÑÑ ÑеализованÑ, "
-"когда никакого ÑоÑÑÑдниÑеÑÑва неÑ,
подавлÑÑÑее болÑÑинÑÑво пÑоекÑов по "
-"ÑазÑабоÑке ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм не имеÑÑ
никакиÑ
ÑеÑ
ниÑеÑкиÑ
пÑеимÑÑеÑÑв по "
-"ÑÑÐ°Ð²Ð½ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ñ Ð½ÐµÑвободнÑм конкÑÑенÑом."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"For free software advocates, these same projects are each seen as important "
-"successes. Because every piece of free software respects its users' freedom, "
-"advocates of software freedom argue that each piece of free software begins "
-"with an inherent ethical advantage over proprietary competitors—even a "
-"more featureful one. By emphasizing freedom over practical advantages, free "
-"software's advocacy is rooted in a technical reality in a way that open "
-"source is often not. When free software is better, we can celebrate this "
-"fact. When it is not, we need not treat it as a damning critique of free "
-"software advocacy or even as a compelling argument against the use of the "
-"software in question."
-msgstr ""
-"СÑоÑонниками Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного
обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÑÑи же ÑамÑе пÑоекÑÑ "
-"ÑаÑÑмаÑÑиваÑÑÑÑ ÐºÐ°Ðº важнÑе доÑÑижениÑ.
ÐоÑколÑÐºÑ ÐºÐ°Ð¶Ð´Ð°Ñ ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамма "
-"ÑÐ²Ð°Ð¶Ð°ÐµÑ ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ñ ÑвоиÑ
полÑзоваÑелей,
заÑиÑники ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамм ÑÑвеÑждаÑÑ, "
-"ÑÑо ÐºÐ°Ð¶Ð´Ð°Ñ ÑÐ²Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑогÑамма ÑождаеÑÑÑ
Ñ Ð½ÐµÐ¾ÑÑемлемÑм ÑÑиÑеÑким "
-"пÑеимÑÑеÑÑвом пеÑед неÑвободнÑми
конкÑÑенÑами — даже еÑли Ñе "
-"более богаÑÑ Ð²Ð¾Ð·Ð¼Ð¾Ð¶Ð½Ð¾ÑÑÑми. ÐÑÐ²Ð¾Ð´Ñ Ð½Ð°
пеÑвое меÑÑо ÑвободÑ, а не "
-"пÑакÑиÑеÑкие доÑÑоинÑÑва, аÑгÑменÑаÑиÑ
Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ "
-"ÑÑ
Ð¾Ð´Ð¸Ñ ÐºÐ¾ÑнÑми в Ñеалии ÑеÑ
ники Ñак, как
оÑкÑÑÑÑй иÑÑ
однÑй ÑекÑÑ ÑаÑÑо ÑÑого "
-"не делаеÑ. Ðогда ÑвободнÑе пÑогÑаммÑ
лÑÑÑе, Ð¼Ñ Ð¼Ð¾Ð¶ÐµÐ¼ оÑмеÑиÑÑ ÑÑÐ¾Ñ ÑакÑ. "
-"Ðогда неÑ, нам Ð½ÐµÑ Ð½ÑÐ¶Ð´Ñ Ð¾ÑноÑиÑÑÑÑ Ðº
ÑÑÐ¾Ð¼Ñ ÐºÐ°Ðº к неоÑÑазимой кÑиÑике "
-"аÑгÑменÑаÑии Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного
обеÑпеÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¸Ð»Ð¸ даже как к "
-"ÑбедиÑелÑÐ½Ð¾Ð¼Ñ Ð°ÑгÑменÑÑ Ð¿ÑоÑив
пÑÐ¸Ð¼ÐµÐ½ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð´Ð°Ð½Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ пÑогÑаммÑ."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Open source advocates must defend their thesis that freely developed "
-"software should, or will with time, be better than proprietary software. "
-"Free software supporters can instead ask, “How can we make free "
-"software better?” In a free software framing, high quality software "
-"exists as a means to an end rather than an end itself. Free software "
-"developers should strive to create functional, flexible software that serves "
-"its users well. But doing so is not the only way to make steps toward "
-"solving what is both an easier and a much more profoundly important goal: "
-"respecting and protecting their freedom."
-msgstr ""
-"СÑоÑонники оÑкÑÑÑого иÑÑ
одного ÑекÑÑа
Ð´Ð¾Ð»Ð¶Ð½Ñ Ð·Ð°ÑиÑаÑÑ Ñвой ÑÐµÐ·Ð¸Ñ Ð¾ Ñом, ÑÑо "
-"Ñвободно ÑазÑабаÑÑваемÑе пÑогÑаммÑ
Ð´Ð¾Ð»Ð¶Ð½Ñ ÑÑаÑÑ Ð¸Ð»Ð¸ ÑÑанÑÑ Ñо вÑеменем "
-"лÑÑÑе, Ñем неÑвободнÑе. СÑоÑонники
ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм вмеÑÑо ÑÑого могÑÑ "
-"ÑпÑаÑиваÑÑ: “Ðак ÑделаÑÑ ÑвободнÑе
пÑогÑÐ°Ð¼Ð¼Ñ Ð»ÑÑÑе?” РконÑекÑÑе "
-"Ñвободного пÑогÑаммного обеÑпеÑениÑ
вÑÑокое каÑеÑÑво пÑогÑамм ÑÑÑеÑÑвÑÐµÑ ÐºÐ°Ðº "
-"ÑÑедÑÑво к доÑÑÐ¸Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ñели, а не как
ÑамоÑелÑ. РазÑабоÑÑикам ÑвободнÑÑ
"
-"пÑогÑамм ÑледÑÐµÑ ÑÑÑемиÑÑÑÑ Ðº ÑозданиÑ
богаÑÑÑ
, гибкиÑ
пÑогÑамм, коÑоÑÑе "
-"Ñ
оÑоÑо ÑлÑÐ¶Ð°Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»ÑзоваÑелÑм. Ðо ÑÑо не
единÑÑвеннÑй ÑпоÑоб пÑедпÑинÑÑÑ Ñаги "
-"к доÑÑÐ¸Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ñого, ÑÑо ÑвлÑеÑÑÑ Ð¸ более
легкой, и гоÑаздо более глÑбокой и "
-"важной ÑелÑÑ: Ñважение и заÑиÑа иÑ
ÑвободÑ."
-
-#. type: Content of: <p>
-msgid ""
-"Of course, we do not need to reject arguments that collaboration can play an "
-"important role in creating high-quality software. In many of the most "
-"successful free software projects, it clearly has done exactly that. The "
-"benefits of collaboration become something to understand, support, and work "
-"towards, rather than something to take for granted in the face of evidence "
-"that refuses to conform to ideology."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐонеÑно, нам не нÑжно оÑвеÑгаÑÑ
аÑгÑменÑов о Ñом, ÑÑо ÑоÑÑÑдниÑеÑÑво Ð¼Ð¾Ð¶ÐµÑ "
-"игÑаÑÑ Ð²Ð°Ð¶Ð½ÑÑ ÑÐ¾Ð»Ñ Ð² Ñоздании пÑогÑамм
вÑÑокого каÑеÑÑва. ЯÑно, ÑÑо во "
-"многиÑ
из ÑамÑÑ
ÑÑпеÑнÑÑ
пÑоекÑов по
ÑÐ¾Ð·Ð´Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ ÑвободнÑÑ
пÑогÑамм иÑ
именно "
-"Ñак и делали. ÐÑÐ³Ð¾Ð´Ñ ÑоÑÑÑдниÑеÑÑва
ÑÑановÑÑÑÑ Ñем, ÑÑо нÑжно понимаÑÑ, "
-"поддеÑживаÑÑ, над Ñем нÑжно ÑабоÑаÑÑ, а не
Ñем, ÑÑо нÑжно пÑинимаÑÑ ÐºÐ°Ðº Ñамо "
-"Ñобой ÑазÑмеÑÑееÑÑ Ð¿ÐµÑед лиÑом
ÑвидеÑелÑÑÑв, коÑоÑÑе оÑказÑваÑÑÑÑ
ÑледоваÑÑ "
-"идеологии."
-
-# type: Content of: <div><div>
-#. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes.
-#. type: Content of: <div>
-msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S NOTES*"
-msgstr " "
-
-#. type: Content of: <div><div><p>
-msgid ""
-"Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to <a
href=\"mailto:address@hidden";
-"\"><address@hidden></a>. There are also <a href=\"/contact/\">other
ways "
-"to contact</a> the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions "
-"can be sent to <a href=\"mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden"
-"org></a>."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐожалÑйÑÑа, пÑиÑÑлайÑе обÑие запÑоÑÑ
ÑÐ¾Ð½Ð´Ñ Ð¸ GNU по адÑеÑÑ <a href=\"mailto:";
-"address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>. ÐÑÑÑ Ñакже <a
href=\"/contact/"
-"\">дÑÑгие ÑпоÑÐ¾Ð±Ñ ÑвÑзаÑÑÑÑ</a> Ñ Ñондом.
ÐÑÑеÑÑ Ð¾ неÑабоÑаÑÑиÑ
ÑÑÑлкаÑ
и "
-"дÑÑгие попÑавки или пÑÐµÐ´Ð»Ð¾Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¼Ð¾Ð¶Ð½Ð¾
пÑиÑÑлаÑÑ Ð¿Ð¾ адÑеÑÑ <a href=\"mailto:";
-"address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>."
-
-#. TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
-#. replace it with the translation of these two:
-#. We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
-#. translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
-#. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
-#. to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>
-#. <address@hidden></a>.</p>
-#. <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
-#. our web pages, see <a
-#. href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
-#. README</a>.
-#. type: Content of: <div><div><p>
-msgid ""
-"Please see the <a href=\"/server/standards/README.translations.html"
-"\">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting "
-"translations of this article."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐÑ ÑÑаÑалиÑÑ ÑделаÑÑ ÑÑÐ¾Ñ Ð¿ÐµÑевод ÑоÑнÑм
и каÑеÑÑвеннÑм, но иÑклÑÑиÑÑ "
-"возможноÑÑÑ Ð¾Ñибки Ð¼Ñ Ð½Ðµ можем.
ÐÑиÑÑлайÑе, пожалÑйÑÑа, Ñвои замеÑÐ°Ð½Ð¸Ñ Ð¸ "
-"пÑÐµÐ´Ð»Ð¾Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¿Ð¾ пеÑÐµÐ²Ð¾Ð´Ñ Ð¿Ð¾ адÑеÑÑ <a
href=\"mailto:address@hidden";
-"\"><address@hidden></a>. </p><p>Ð¡Ð²ÐµÐ´ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¿Ð¾
кооÑдинаÑии и "
-"пÑедложениÑм пеÑеводов наÑиÑ
ÑÑаÑей Ñм. в
<a href=\"/server/standards/README."
-"translations.html\">“Ð ÑководÑÑве по
пеÑеводам”</a>."
-
-#. type: Content of: <div><p>
-msgid "Copyright © 1999-2011 Benjamin Mako Hill"
-msgstr ""
-"Copyright © 1999-2011 Benjamin Mako Hill<br />Copyright © 2013 "
-"Free Software Foundation, Inc. (translation)"
-
-#. type: Content of: <div><p>
-msgid ""
-"This page is licensed under a <a rel=\"license\" href=\"http://";
-"creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/\">Creative Commons Attribution-"
-"Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>."
-msgstr ""
-"ÐÑо пÑоизведение доÑÑÑпно по <a rel=\"license\"
href=\"http://";
-"creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/deed.ru\">лиÑензии Creative
"
-"Commons Attribution-NoDerivs (<em>ÐÑÑибÑÑÐ¸Ñ — С ÑоÑ
Ñанением "
-"ÑÑловий</em>) 3.0 СШÐ</a>."
-
-# type: Content of: <div><div>
-#. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.
-#. type: Content of: <div><div>
-msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*"
-msgstr ""
-"<em>Ðнимание! РподгоÑовке ÑÑого пеÑевода
ÑÑаÑÑвовал ÑолÑко один Ñеловек. ÐÑ "
-"можеÑе ÑÑÑеÑÑвенно ÑлÑÑÑиÑÑ Ð¿ÐµÑевод, еÑли
пÑовеÑиÑе его и ÑаÑÑкажеÑе о "
-"найденнÑÑ
оÑибкаÑ
в <a
href=\"http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ru";
-"\">ÑÑÑÑкой гÑÑппе пеÑеводов gnu.org</a>.</em>"
-
-#. timestamp start
-#. type: Content of: <div><p>
-msgid "Updated:"
-msgstr "Ðбновлено:"
Index: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.translist
===================================================================
RCS file: when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.translist
diff -N when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.translist
--- when_free_software_isnt_practically_superior.translist 16 Mar 2015
15:59:39 -0000 1.1
+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
@@ -1,15 +0,0 @@
-<!-- begin translist file -->
-<!--#set var="TRANSLATION_LIST"
-value='<div id="translations">
-<p>
-<span dir="ltr" class="original"><a lang="en" hreflang="en"
href="/philosophy/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.en.html">English</a> [en]</span>
-<span dir="ltr"><a lang="fr" hreflang="fr"
href="/philosophy/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</span>
-<span dir="ltr"><a lang="ru" hreflang="ru"
href="/philosophy/when_free_software_isnt_practically_better.ru.html">ÑÑÑÑкий</a> [ru]</span>
-</p>
-</div>' -->
-<!--#if expr="$HTML_BODY = yes" -->
-<!-- Fallback for old position of translist; to be removed
- when translists in all translations are included before banner.html. -->
-<!--#echo encoding="none" var="TRANSLATION_LIST" -->
-<!--#endif -->
-<!-- end translist file -->