headers
Igshaan Mesias | 8 Nov 2009 22:42
Picon
Gravatar

Rpmlint does not like my license

Hi Everyone

I've packaged the M+ collection of fonts. I've not yet submitted a
review because I am unsure about what to label the 'License' tag in spec
file given its authors have simply put the license as follows:

http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/index-en.html#license

"These fonts are free softwares. 
Unlimited permission is granted to use, copy, and distribute it, with or
without modification, either commercially and noncommercially. 
THESE FONTS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY."

The following page notes the license as being "mplus", however, rpmlint
will not like this, so my question is, should I leave the 'License' tag
in the spec file as Mplus and let rpmlint moan, or do I change to
something it likes? if so what do I change it to?

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Fonts

--

-- 
Igshaan Mesias <igshaan.mesias@...>
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Tom "spot" Callaway | 9 Nov 2009 02:51
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Rpmlint does not like my license

On 11/09/2009 07:42 AM, Igshaan Mesias wrote:
> Hi Everyone
> 
> 
> I've packaged the M+ collection of fonts. I've not yet submitted a
> review because I am unsure about what to label the 'License' tag in spec
> file given its authors have simply put the license as follows:
> 
> http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/index-en.html#license
> 
> "These fonts are free softwares. 
> Unlimited permission is granted to use, copy, and distribute it, with or
> without modification, either commercially and noncommercially. 
> THESE FONTS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY."
> 
> The following page notes the license as being "mplus", however, rpmlint
> will not like this, so my question is, should I leave the 'License' tag
> in the spec file as Mplus and let rpmlint moan, or do I change to
> something it likes? if so what do I change it to?

If the license table has it as a valid and acceptable license, you're
fine. RPMlint probably needs to have its license list updated.

~spot
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Nicolas Mailhot | 9 Nov 2009 11:15
Favicon

Re: Rpmlint does not like my license


Le Dim 8 novembre 2009 22:42, Igshaan Mesias a écrit :

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Fonts

Takes precedence over whatever rpmlint says. rpmlint is not Fedora policy,
it's just a convenience (rmplint is often right but has been known to be
terribly wrong too; the rpmlint author considers himself above Fedora
packaging rules)

And if you have any doubt about licensing, always ask Spot (Tom Callaway) on
irc or by mail. He's the person interfacing with the lawyers Red Hat puts at
the disposition of Fedora (and the person maintaining our licensing matrixes)

--

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Igshaan Mesias | 9 Nov 2009 20:15
Picon
Gravatar

M+ fonts

Hi,

I have packaged M+ family of fonts.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/M%2B_fonts

You can find the review request here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533919

Be gentle,

--

-- 
Igshaan Mesias <igshaan.mesias@...>
Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
かいお (Kaio | 10 Nov 2009 00:49
Gravatar

Re: M+ fonts

(2009年11月10日 05:15), Igshaan Mesias wrote:
> I have packaged M+ family of fonts.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/M%2B_fonts
>    
Hi Igshaan,

I wonder if you could package it with alphanumeric name? such as 
mplus-fonts because I worry if usage of `+` could pass the package 
review. :)

Regards,
kaio

--

-- 
かいお kaio | kaio.me
Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Igshaan Mesias | 10 Nov 2009 06:22
Picon
Gravatar

Re: M+ fonts

Hi,

2009/11/10 "かいお (Kaio)" <k <at> kaio.me>:
> (2009年11月10日 05:15), Igshaan Mesias wrote:
>>
>> I have packaged M+ family of fonts.
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/M%2B_fonts
>>
>
> Hi Igshaan,
>
> I wonder if you could package it with alphanumeric name? such as mplus-fonts
> because I worry if usage of `+` could pass the package review. :)

The actual package name is 'mplus-fonts'. I have not made use of the
'+' for this very reason.

--
Igshaan Mesias <igshaan.mesias@...>
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
かいお (Kaio | 10 Nov 2009 07:03
Gravatar

Re: M+ fonts

(CC'ed Tom 'spot' Callaway)

(2009年11月10日 15:22), Igshaan Mesias wrote:
> 2009/11/10 "かいお (Kaio)" <k <at> kaio.me>:
>   
>> (2009年11月10日 05:15), Igshaan Mesias wrote:
>>     
>>> I have packaged M+ family of fonts.
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/M%2B_fonts
>>>       
>> I wonder if you could package it with alphanumeric name? such as mplus-fonts
>> because I worry if usage of `+` could pass the package review. :)
>>     
> The actual package name is 'mplus-fonts'. I have not made use of the
> '+' for this very reason.
>
>   
Are all the fonts listed in
http://www.geocities.jp/ep3797/modified_fonts_01.html members of mplus font?

Also the license statements on
http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/#license in full?

Could you persuade the author to release under GPL or any other better
license?

For legal issues please contact Tom 'spot' Callaway.

Regards,
kaio
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Igshaan Mesias | 10 Nov 2009 07:45
Picon
Gravatar

Re: M+ fonts

Hi,

2009/11/10 "かいお (Kaio)" <k <at> kaio.me>:
> (CC'ed Tom 'spot' Callaway)
>
> Are all the fonts listed in
> http://www.geocities.jp/ep3797/modified_fonts_01.html members of mplus font?

Those fonts are not in my package, only the ones listed here:
http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/design/index-en.html
Which Tom has noted his approval.

> Also the license statements on
> http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/#license in full?
>
> Could you persuade the author to release under GPL or any other better
> license?

I will try.

--
Igshaan Mesias <igshaan.mesias@...>
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
かいお (Kaio | 10 Nov 2009 08:05
Gravatar

Re: M+ fonts

(2009年11月10日 16:45), Igshaan Mesias wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2009/11/10 "かいお (Kaio)"<k <at> kaio.me>:
>    
>> (CC'ed Tom 'spot' Callaway)
>>
>> Are all the fonts listed in
>> http://www.geocities.jp/ep3797/modified_fonts_01.html members of mplus font?
>>      
> Those fonts are not in my package, only the ones listed here:
> http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/design/index-en.html
> Which Tom has noted his approval.
>
>    
Then cool. ;)

>> Also the license statements on
>> http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/#license in full?
>>
>> Could you persuade the author to release under GPL or any other better
>> license?
>>      
> I will try.
>    
Also cool. ;)

--

-- 
かいお kaio | kaio.me
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Nicolas Mailhot | 10 Nov 2009 16:00
Favicon

Re: M+ fonts


Le Mar 10 novembre 2009 07:45, Igshaan Mesias a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> 2009/11/10 "かいお (Kaio)" <k <at> kaio.me>:
>> (CC'ed Tom 'spot' Callaway)
>>
>> Are all the fonts listed in
>> http://www.geocities.jp/ep3797/modified_fonts_01.html members of mplus font?

The font listed there seem to be mixes of multiple fonts. Which is only going
to work if the licenses of all the font files used are compatible with each
other (mixes is one big reason why sticking to standard licenses is a good
idea)

>> Also the license statements on
>> http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/#license in full?
>>
>> Could you persuade the author to release under GPL or any other better
>> license?
>
> I will try.

GPL + FE or OFl please

--

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane