GNU bug report logs - #26588
Add some (non-free?) font licenses.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #27 received at 26588 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Clément Lassieur <clement <at> lassieur.org>
To: Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
Cc: 26588 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#26588: [PATCH 1/3] licenses: Add Bitstream Vera.
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 11:57:00 +0200

Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:

> Hello! Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> Clément Lassieur <clement <at> lassieur.org> 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?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.