Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

licensing related stuff #1

Closed
urbec-guest opened this issue Jan 29, 2022 · 7 comments
Closed

licensing related stuff #1

urbec-guest opened this issue Jan 29, 2022 · 7 comments

Comments

@urbec-guest
Copy link

Hi,

while packaging fantasma for Debian,
I stumbled over two minor licensing related things.

  1. The glyphs file does not have fsType [1] set,
    what makes fontmake default to setting it to "edit only"
    when generating the otf/ttf, what contradicts with the license choice
    of GPL-3 + font exception
    and makes our rather picky linting tool complaining :)
    Attached a patch [2] to set the value to "installable embedding".

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/os2#fstype
[2] (https://github.com/froyotam/Fantasma/files/7964601/0001-Explicitly-setting-fsType-value-to-0-installable-emb.txt)

  1. The fonts exception to GPL-3 was added after release 1.0 -
    would it be possible to make another release
    that includes the font exception?
@froyotam
Copy link
Owner

froyotam commented Jan 29, 2022 via email

@urbec-guest
Copy link
Author

Hello, I am considering changing the license to CC0.
Would that work for you? Best, Froyo

As GPL-3+FE would have already worked well
and CC0 is even far more permissive, yes that would work indeed :)
(though I assume it would not affect the posters as for those their Authors would need to agree to the change, but I did not put those into the package anyway)

If you would consider making a release with either the new license
(or the font exception if you decide to stay with GPL)
I would just wait for that one.

Thanks for your reply :)

@froyotam
Copy link
Owner

froyotam commented Jan 29, 2022 via email

@urbec-guest
Copy link
Author

urbec-guest commented Jan 29, 2022

Once I change the license.txt, what other steps would I need to take?

Basically just add a second release tag to git (the current one is 1.0
so probably 2.0 or 1.1)
(The patch I attached basically just makes it explicit, that nothing about embedding is forbidden, though of course it's just an offer :))

@froyotam
Copy link
Owner

froyotam commented Jan 29, 2022 via email

@urbec-guest
Copy link
Author

urbec-guest commented Jan 29, 2022

Let me know if there's anything else I would need to do!

No, all is fine.

Thanks :)

@froyotam
Copy link
Owner

froyotam commented Jan 29, 2022 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants