free-doc.html - en to ro translation catalogue (17 entries)

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The biggest deficiency in free operating systems is not in the software&mdash;it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in these systems.  Many of our most important programs do not come with full manuals.  Documentation is an essential part of any software package; when an important free software package does not come with a free manual, that is a major gap.  We have many such gaps today.
ro: Cea mai mare deficienta a sistemelor de operare libere nu se afla in programe — este localizata in lipsa unor manuale libere bune pe care sa le putem include in acestea. Multe din cele mai importante programe ale noastre nu vin cu manuale complete. Documentatia este o parte esentiala a oricarui pachet software; cand pachetul unui software important care este liber nu vine cu un manual liber, avem de-a face cu o mare lipsa. Avem multe astfel de lipse in ziua de azi.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: That wasn't the first time this sort of thing has happened, and (to our community's great loss) it was far from the last.  Proprietary manual publishers have enticed a great many authors to restrict their manuals since then.  Many times I have heard a GNU user eagerly tell me about a manual that he is writing, with which he expects to help the GNU Project&mdash;and then had my hopes dashed, as he proceeded to explain that he had signed a contract with a publisher that would restrict it so that we cannot use it.
ro: Aceasta nu a fost prima oara cand astfel de lucruri s-au intamplat si (spre marea pierdere a comunitatii noastre) era departe de a fi ultima. Editorii de manuale private au ademenit de atunci multi autori sa-si restrictioneze manualele. Am auzit de multe ori un utilizator GNU zicandu-mi entuziasmat despre un manual pe care il scrie, care se astepta sa ajute proiectul GNU — si apoi sa-mi fie zdrobite sperantele cand a inceput sa-mi explice ca semnase un contract cu un editor care va pune restrictii astfel incat noi nu-l vom putea folosi.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Given that writing good English is a rare skill among programmers, we can ill afford to lose manuals this way.
ro: Deoarece scrierea unei engleze bune este o calitate rara printre programatori, ne putem permite cu dificultate sa pierdem manuale in acest fel.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for free software: it is a matter of giving all users certain freedoms.  Redistribution (including commercial redistribution) must be permitted, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the program, on line or on paper.  Permission for modification is crucial too.
ro: Criteriul pentru un manual liber este aproximativ acelasi ca si pentru software liber; este o chestiune de a da tuturor utilizatorilor anumite libertati. Redistribuirea (inclusiv redistribuirea comerciala) trebuie sa fie permisa, astfel incat manualul poate insoti fiecare copie a programului, pe retea sau pe hartie. Permisiunea de a modifica este de asemenea cruciala.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: As a general rule, I don't believe that it is essential for people to have permission to modify all sorts of articles and books.  The issues for writings are not necessarily the same as those for software.  For example, I don't think you or I are obliged to give permission to modify articles like this one, which describe our actions and our views.
ro: Ca o regula generala, nu cred ca este esential pentru oameni sa aiba permisiunea de a modifica tot felul de articole si carti. Problemele pentru scrieri nu sunt in mod neaparat aceleasi ca si pentru software. De exemplu, eu nu cred ca sunteti sau sunt obligat de a da permisiunea de a modifica articole ca acesta, care descriu actiunile sau opiniile noastre.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial for documentation for free software.  When people exercise their right to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are conscientious they will change the manual too&mdash;so they can provide accurate and usable documentation with the modified program.  A manual which forbids programmers from being conscientious and finishing the job, or more precisely requires them to write a new manual from scratch if they change the program, does not fill our community's needs.
ro: Dar exista un motiv anume pentru care libertatea de a modifica este esentiala pentru documentatia unui software liber. Cand oamenii isi exercita dreptul lor de a modifica programul si ii adauga sau ii modifica facilitatile, daca sunt constiinciosi, de asemenea ii vor modifica si manualul — astfel incat sa poata oferi documentatie exacta si utilizabila odata cu programul modificat. Un manual care interzice programatorilor de a fi scrupulosi si sa termine treaba, sau mai exact le cere sa scrie un nou manual de la inceput daca modifica programul, nu satisface necesitatile comunitatii noastre.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: While a blanket prohibition on modification is unacceptable, some kinds of limits on the method of modification pose no problem.  For example, requirements to preserve the original author's copyright notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are OK.  It is also no problem to require modified versions to include notice that they were modified, even to have entire sections that may not be deleted or changed, as long as these sections deal with nontechnical topics.  (Some GNU manuals have them.)
ro: In timp ce o interdictie inabusitoare asupra modificarii este inacceptabila, unele tipuri de interdictii asupra metodei de modificare nu pun nici o problema. De exemplu, cerinta de a mentine nota de drept de autor a autorului original, termenii de distributie sau lista de autori este in regula. De asemenea nu este nici o problema in a cere ca versiuni modificate sa includa note in care sa se specifice ca au fost modificate, chiar sa aiba parti intregi ce nu pot fi sterse sau modificate, atat timp cat aceste parti se ocupa de elemente non-tehnice. (Unele manuale GNU le au.)

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because, as a practical matter, they don't stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the manual to fit the modified program.  In other words, they don't block the free software community from making full use of the manual.
ro: Aceste tipuri de restrictii nu sunt o problema deoarece, din punct de vedere practic, nu opresc programatorul constiincios in a adapta manualul astfel incat sa se potriveasca programului modificat. Cu alte cuvinte, nu opresc comunitatea de software liber in a se folosi din plin de manual.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: However, it must be possible to modify all the <em>technical</em> content of the manual, and then distribute the result through all the usual media, through all the usual channels; otherwise, the restrictions do block the community, the manual is not free, and so we need another manual.
ro: Totusi, trebuie sa fie posibila sa se modifice intreg continutul <em>tehnic</em> si apoi sa se distribuie rezultatul prin media obisnuita, prin toate canalele obisnuite; altfel, restrictiile blocheaza comunitatea, manualul nu este liber si avem astfel nevoie de un alt manual.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Unfortunately, it is often hard to find someone to write another manual when a proprietary manual exists.  The obstacle is that many users think that a proprietary manual is good enough&mdash;so they don't see the need to write a free manual.  They do not see that the free operating system has a gap that needs filling.
ro: Din pacate, este adeseori greu de gasit cineva sa scrie un alt manual cand deja exista un manual privat. Obstacolul este ca multi utilizatori cred ca un manual privat este destul de bun — astfel incat ei nu vad nevoia de a scrie un manual liber. Ei nu vad ca sistemul de operare liber are o lipsa care trebuie reparata.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Why do users think that proprietary manuals are good enough? Some have not considered the issue.  I hope this article will do something to change that.
ro: De ce cred utilizatorii ca manualele private sunt destul de bune? Unii nu s-au gandit la problema. Sper ca acest articol va face ceva pentru a schimba asta.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Other users consider proprietary manuals acceptable for the same reason so many people consider proprietary software acceptable: they judge in purely practical terms, not using freedom as a criterion.  These people are entitled to their opinions, but since those opinions spring from values which do not include freedom, they are no guide for those of us who do value freedom.
ro: Alti utilizatori considera manualele private acceptabile din acelasi motiv pentru care atat de multi oameni considera programele private acceptabile; ei judeca in termeni pur practici, nu folosesc libertatea ca si un criteriu. Acesti oameni au dreptul la parerile lor, dar din moment ce aceste opinii vin de la valori care nu includ libertatea, ei nu sunt un ghid pentru acei dintre noi care aprecieaza libertatea.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Please spread the word about this issue.  We continue to lose manuals to proprietary publishing.  If we spread the word that proprietary manuals are not sufficient, perhaps the next person who wants to help GNU by writing documentation will realize, before it is too late, that he must above all make it free.
ro: Va rog sa spuneti mai departe despre aceasta problema. Noi pierdem in continuare manuale in fata editorilor privati. Daca spunem mai departe ca manualele private nu sunt suficiente, poate urmatoarea persoana care vrea sa ajute GNU prin scrierea de documentatie va realiza, inainte de a fi prea tarziu, ca trebuie inainte de toate sa o faca libera.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We can also encourage commercial publishers to sell free, copylefted manuals instead of proprietary ones.  One way you can help this is to check the distribution terms of a manual before you buy it, and prefer copylefted manuals to noncopylefted ones.
ro: De asemenea putem incuraja editorii comerciali sa vanda manuale libere in locul celor private. O metoda prin care puteti ajuta aceasta este sa verificati termenii de distribuitie ai manualului inainte de a-l cumpara si sa preferati manualele libere in locul celor private.

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</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:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
ro: Pentru întrebări generale legate de FSF și GNU, vă rugăm să scrieți la <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  Există și <a href="/contact/">alte moduri de a contacta</a> FSF. Legăturile stricate și alte corecturi sau sugestii pot fi trimise la <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
ro: Tradus de Emilian Bold

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
ro: Actualizată:
