Subject: Re: bug#26588: [PATCH 1/3] licenses: Add Bitstream Vera.

From: Clément Lassieur <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 11:57:00 +0200

Marius Bakke <[email-masked]> writes:

> Hello! Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> Clément Lassieur <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>> * guix/licenses.scm (bitstream-vera): New variable.
>
> [...]
>   
>> +(define bitstream-vera
>> +  (license "Bitstream Vera"
>> +           "https://www.gnome.org/fonts/#Final_Bitstream_Vera_Fonts"
>> +           "\"The Font Software may be sold as part of a larger software package
>> +but no copy of one or more of the Font Software typefaces may be sold by
>> +itself.\"
>> +
>> +The license is non-free because of the above clause, but a Guix package is a
>> +\"larger software package\"."))
>
> Instead of "officially recognizing" these licenses, which are unlikely
> to be re-used and ostensibly non-free, perhaps we could have a
> "fsdg-compatible" license procedure similar to "fsf-free". What do you
> think?

Well, bitstream-vera is used twice (if we include 0ad).  But anyway
that's okay.  I should specify in the fsdg-compatible 'comment' argument
that it is non-free, right?  Or maybe all fsdg-compatible would be
non-free?