Hi,
Thanks for reviewing. I think you are right about the ubuntu font,
according to this wikipedia article[1], both debian and fedora have
reviewed the license as non-free.
I have chosen Lato as a replacement, which is licensed under the SIL
Open Font License 1.1[2], which is FSF approved[3].
Are there any other steps I should take for the project to get approved?
Thanks again,
Jochem
[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_%28typeface%29#Ubuntu_Font_Licence
[2]:https://www.google.com/fonts/specimen/Lato
[3]:https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SILOFL
On 2016-07-30 19:58, Hugh Mayfield wrote:
Update of task #14106 (project administration):
Status: None => In Progress
Assigned to: None => hlam
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #1:
Jochem, thanks for submitting. The project looks fine, except for the
below.
List: there is a font included in the tarball licensed under the
"Ubuntu Font
License." I can't see that this is either covered on the FSF's
commented list
of licenses [1], or listed as license option on the Savannah project
registration page. The license does to my non-legal mind look like it
might
be acceptable, but I don't want to approve before checking what we
should do
in this situation - please advise.
[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html.en
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?14106>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/