On Fri 2007-08-31 02:26:55 -0400, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > Yes, I will gladly upload your package.
Thanks, Rafael! > In the SIL website [1], it is claimed that OFL is DFSG-compliant. > Do you know of any public discussion (in debian-legal, for instance) > about this? Good question. There was a discussion of the draft of OFL 1.1 here: http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/thread/20061221.004357.b55623ff.en.html and after the 1.1 release, more disussion: http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/thread/20070228.063718.83da0199.en.html The only caveat i've heard from folks is that Reserved Font Names other than prior names of the font seem non-DFSG-free. since i've got no Reserved Font Names other than the original name, i don't think that's an issue. Furthermore, the ftp-masters seem OK with it: the gentium package is already in main, under the OFL: [0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ grep 'Open Font License' /usr/share/doc/ttf-sil-gentium/copyright This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, The goals of the Open Font License (OFL) are to stimulate worldwide [0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ apt-cache policy ttf-sil-gentium ttf-sil-gentium: Installed: 1.02+dfsg-4 Candidate: 1.02+dfsg-4 Version table: *** 1.02+dfsg-4 0 500 http://ftp.debian.org testing/main Packages 200 http://ftp.debian.org unstable/main Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status [0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ as well as other font packages, i think, such as charis and doulos: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/t/ttf-sil-charis/ttf-sil-charis_4.100-1/ttf-sil-charis.copyright http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/t/ttf-sil-doulos/ttf-sil-doulos_4.100-1/ttf-sil-doulos.copyright Let me know if you've got more questions about it. Thanks for your interest and your help. Regards, --dkg
pgp1ZC52FFDDM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
