On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 13:51 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > 7. The font situation is bad enough we have a font exception to our > FLOSS rules > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-daa717ea096fa4d9cf7b9a49b5edb36e3bda3aac > [for example we ship Luxi even though its licensing forbids > modification, making it non-free > http://www.xfree86.org/current/LICENSE11.html] Open a bug report. Let's start the process of having it removed in F9. > 8. There are efforts to drain the font licensing swamp and promote > FLOSS fonts (http://unifont.org/go_for_ofl/), they are aligned with > Fedora general objectives yet Fedora has totally ignored them so far > (cf Liberation licensing choices) Keep in mind that Liberation licensing was a Red Hat, Inc decision, not a Fedora decision. Also, we haven't totally ignored the OFL, since it is listed as the "preferred" font license on the Fedora licensing page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/Fonts ~spot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
