To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=72124
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 6 03:04:15 -0800 2006 ------- mh: only if they are free (like not the current ones) For that matter, there was a mail exchange after I closed the Debian Bug#40132 after removing the non-free afms: --- snip --- Von: Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: Rene Engelhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kopie: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], Moritz Mühlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Rene Engelhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Package: openoffice.org > Severity: serious > > From: Moritz Mühlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Potential non-free content in OpenOffice package > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:24:05 +0100 > > Hi Rene, hi Chris, > we noticed a potentially non-free file in the Debian Openoffice.org package in > sid: Courier-Bold.afm contains the following copyright header: > > |Comment Copyright (c) 1989 1990 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights > reserved. These are probably the same AFM files that were relicensed by Adobe in the Public Domain (essentially) in spring. They can be downloaded from ftp://cam.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/adobe/afm/Adobe-Core35_AFMs-314.tar.gz. The files still contain the "All rights reserved" header, but there's a file MustRead.html which contains ,---- | This file and the 35 PostScript(R) AFM files it accompanies may be | used, copied, and distributed for any purpose and without charge, with | or without modification, provided that all copyright notices are | retained; that the AFM files are not distributed without this file; | that all modifications to this file or any of the AFM files are | prominently noted in the modified file(s); and that this paragraph is | not modified. Adobe Systems has no responsibility or obligation to | support the use of the AFM files. `---- Some more information about the relicensing might be available in the archives of tex-live, http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/. Werner LEMBERG <wl at gnu.org> took care of that. So it would not have been necessary to remove them, I think. Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive) --- snip --- --- snip --- Von: Rene Engelhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kopie: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], Moritz Mühlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Am Mittwoch, 6. Dezember 2006 08:12 schrieben Sie: > These are probably the same AFM files that were relicensed by Adobe in > the Public Domain (essentially) in spring. They can be downloaded from > ftp://cam.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/adobe/afm/Adobe-Core35_AFMs-314.tar.gz. No, they are not. e.g: ~/OpenOffice.org/OOE680/psprint_config/configuration/afm$ md5sum Courier-Bold.afm fc8048ff93479289d824937b25bea84c Courier-Bold.afm ~/Adobe-Core35_AFMs-314> md5sum Courier-Bold.afm 58e0566c5e2a1a62756a57a100a62dc3 Courier-Bold.afm ~/Adobe-Core35_AFMs-229> md5sum Courier-Bold.afm aa3007a9076dea36db4fabe2a36ed463 Courier-Bold.afm But those files probably can be replaced by the new, apparently free ones. > The files still contain the "All rights reserved" header, but there's a > file MustRead.html which contains > > ,---- > | This file and the 35 PostScript(R) AFM files it accompanies may be > | used, copied, and distributed for any purpose and without charge, with > | or without modification, provided that all copyright notices are > | retained; that the AFM files are not distributed without this file; > | that all modifications to this file or any of the AFM files are > | prominently noted in the modified file(s); and that this paragraph is > | not modified. Adobe Systems has no responsibility or obligation to > | support the use of the AFM files. > `---- > > Some more information about the relicensing might be available in the > archives of tex-live, http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/. Werner LEMBERG > <wl at gnu.org> took care of that. > > So it would not have been necessary to remove them, I think. Wrong. (See above). Of course, we could readd the new ones, but the old ones had to be removed. Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73 --- snip --- The solution here is to get that files, put it into an external project with license file, as mh says. So far for the afms. What with the two PPDs? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
