On 07/19/2013 01:13 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Robert Marcano
<robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Not all fonts installed had the same licensing requirement, people install
fonts from other places that are not as careful as Fedora with the licenses.
It is problematic if someone install a non free font to be used on their
desktop application and automatically the font is shared on the network
because he installed a web application on their machine
Good point! That's something I hadn't considered.
If some web applications needs a font it must create the symlink of that
font on that package
First of all, regardless of whether or not the shared directory exists
web applications are permitted by the draft guidelines to use symlinks
or Apache's Alias directive to make web assets available in their
namespace. This makes migration a lot easier in many cases.
But we don't have to kill of the shared directory just to work around
this. We can just whitelist fonts installed from the Fedora package
collection and blacklist the rest unless the sysadmin specifically
enables them.
I am not sure it is good to share by default files that are not needed
by other web applications. The definition of the directory is fine for
me, but packages must be responsible to say which fonts to share, not by
default.
Fonts has licenses, some of them require the license to be shown or the
copyright displayed, some fonts has the copyright added to their
metadata, I don't find for example that gnu-free-serif-fonts says on
it's metadata that is GPL+3 with exceptions. If the font is used by an
applications as a web asset, It is responsibility of the application to
follow the font license (showing the copyright on a page, for example),
but free to download files are a problem
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
