[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#26588: [PATCH 1/3] licenses: Add Bitstream Vera.
From: |
Clément Lassieur |
Subject: |
bug#26588: [PATCH 1/3] licenses: Add Bitstream Vera. |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Apr 2017 11:57:00 +0200 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 0.9.18; emacs 25.2.1 |
Marius Bakke <address@hidden> writes:
> Hello! Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> Clément Lassieur <address@hidden> 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?