Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG & Type 1 Postscript embedded fonts

On 2017-01-29 10:08, Andy Simpkins wrote: On 29/01/17 13:18, Paul Wise wrote: On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Andy Simpkins wrote: It is our belief that this is sufficient; that the package FontForge, and type 1 fonts generated by this package are now DFSG compliant because Apache 2.0 is GPL2+

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG & Type 1 Postscript embedded fonts

On 29/01/17 13:18, Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Andy Simpkins wrote: > >> It is our belief that this is sufficient; that the package FontForge, >> and type 1 fonts generated by this package are now DFSG compliant >> because Apache 2.0 is GPL2+ compatible. > The FSF believes

Bug#694320: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG & Type 1 Postscript embedded fonts

On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Andy Simpkins wrote: > It is our belief that this is sufficient; that the package FontForge, > and type 1 fonts generated by this package are now DFSG compliant > because Apache 2.0 is GPL2+ compatible. The FSF believes that Apache 2.0 is only compatible with GP

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge (currently August 2014)

Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes: > Hi Vasudev-- > > On Sat 2016-07-30 03:17:01 -0400, Vasudev Kamath wrote: > >> Do you still find this problem in latest fontforge in Debian >> experimental?.. I did a quick search in fontforge/othersubrs.c file I >> did not find exact license text you posted. > > I do

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge (currently August 2014)

Hi Vasudev-- On Sat 2016-07-30 03:17:01 -0400, Vasudev Kamath wrote: > Do you still find this problem in latest fontforge in Debian > experimental?.. I did a quick search in fontforge/othersubrs.c file I > did not find exact license text you posted. I don't see that license text either, but ther

Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge (currently August 2014)

Hi Dkg, Do you still find this problem in latest fontforge in Debian experimental?.. I did a quick search in fontforge/othersubrs.c file I did not find exact license text you posted. Since I became the new maintainer of fontforge, this bug popped up on my Maintainer Dashboard :-). So wondering i

Bug#665334: Bug#694308: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge

to be based on > https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko/tree/master/FDK/Tools/Programs/public/lib/source/t1write/t1write_flexothers.* > and now Adobe Font Development Kit for OpenType (AFDKO) is licensed under > Apache-2.0 license. Fontforge is licensed under GPL-3, so it's not a >

Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge

t for OpenType (AFDKO) is licensed under Apache-2.0 license. Fontforge is licensed under GPL-3, so it's not a problem to embedded it. Thanks, Read and other folks in Adobe :) Bug#665334 "non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge" is solved. However, I don't know it is okay

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

The autohint code is now all open source, within the github depot at: https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko - Read On 11/24/15, 3:05 PM, "Daniel Kahn Gillmor" wrote: >On Tue 2015-06-23 20:14:51 -0400, Michael Gardner wrote: >> What's the status of the autohint relicensing? >> >> On Sun, A

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

On Tue 2015-06-23 20:14:51 -0400, Michael Gardner wrote: > What's the status of the autohint relicensing? > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Read Roberts wrote: >> I am working on this now, and the major legal hurdles have been cleared. >> It may still be several months for all the paperwork to

Bug#665334:

Ping?

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

What's the status of the autohint relicensing? On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Read Roberts wrote: > I am working on this now, and the major legal hurdles have been cleared. > It may still be several months for all the paperwork to get done, but I > will have finished the development work within

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Read Roberts wrote: > I am working on this now, and the major legal hurdles have been cleared. > It may still be several months for all the paperwork to get done, but I > will have finished the development work within a week or two. Definitely > happening by August

Bug#694308: Relicensing tracked on bug #665334

Control: block -1 by 665334 The request that Adobe relicense this code is being tracked on ; according to , the relicensing should be done by August. Of course, it still won't be safe to actually modify this code (implementations

Processed: Relicensing tracked on bug #665334

Processing control commands: > block -1 by 665334 Bug #694308 [general] A lot of type 1 fonts include Adobe all right reserved code 694308 was not blocked by any bugs. 694308 was blocking: 694320 694321 694323 694324 694325 694354 694459 717636 Added blocking bug(s) of 694308: 665334 -- 694308:

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

I am working on this now, and the major legal hurdles have been cleared. It may still be several months for all the paperwork to get done, but I will have finished the development work within a week or two. Definitely happening by August. - Read Roberts On 4/13/14, 6:12 AM, "Bastien ROUCARIES"

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

What is the status of the autohinting license for fonts ? Bastien On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Read Roberts wrote: > Hello Bastian; > > I am the person would would address any problems in the Adobe 'autohint' > program. However, I'm not sure what issue you are referencing. I have on > file a

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

Dear robert, Any news of the font hint license problem ? I suppose it is late. Thank you by advance. Bastien On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Read Roberts wrote: > Hello Bastian; > > I am the person would would address any problems in the Adobe 'autohint' > program. However, I'm not sure what

Bug#665334: Talk to a flightsimmer friend about us

Dear user, Do you know someone that flights virtually ?, don't hesitate to talk about us. Forward this mail to yours flightsimmers friends They can follow us at www.facebook.com/mikedeltafsxlogsystem and start logging their fl

Bug#665334: Talk to a flightsimmer friend about us

Dear user, Do you know someone that flights virtually ?, don't hesitate to talk about us. Forward this mail to yours flightsimmers friends They can follow us at www.facebook.com/mikedeltafsxlogsystem and start logging their fl

Bug#665334: FSX software and flight log system

Mikedelta.fr announces: Flight simulator compatible software and Pilot services Info for passengers As a passenger you see sometimes a screen with basic i

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

Hello Bastian; I am the person would would address any problems in the Adobe 'autohint' program. However, I'm not sure what issue you are referencing. I have on file a request from Daniel Kahn Gillmor to make the MM subsrs OpenSource, so that FontForge can build MM fonts. I do plan to make the AF

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

I see that this set of PS code that needs to be OepnSource includes all the OtherSubrs, not just the MM OtherSubrs. Same answer as for the OtherSubrs MM code: Sounds like a good idea to make this OpenSource. It is not a lot of work, but the Type Dept is low on legal resources. I will take this up

Bug#665334: Adobe font hinting

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Read Roberts wrote: > Hello Bastian; > > I am the person would would address any problems in the Adobe 'autohint' > program. However, I'm not sure what issue you are referencing. I have on > file a request from Daniel Kahn Gillmor to make > the MM subsrs OpenSourc

Bug#665334: [fontforge] generic bug

control: clone -1 Control: retitle -1 A lot of type 1 fonts include Adobe all right reserved code Control: reassign -1 generic On my debian box they are 34 font file included adobe all right reserved code find . -name *.pfb -exec t1disasm {} \; | grep -i "Copyright (c) 1987-1990 Adobe Systems In

Bug#665334: [fontforge] Possible replacement

Package: fontforge Please see this thread it seems that we could reimplement OtherSubrs a https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=fr&fromgroups=#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/KVEA6v8am4Q and https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=fr&fromgroups=#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/slZmIvTxjKQ thanks -- To UNS

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge #665334

Hi Read-- Thanks for the thoughtful and helpful followup! Comments below: On 09/04/2012 11:33 AM, Read Roberts wrote: > Given enough time, Adobe could publish the MM othersubr code under an > OpenSource license. However, although the Adobe Type Dept could request > this pretty quickly, it wo

Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge #665334

Given enough time, Adobe could publish the MM othersubr code under an OpenSource license. However, although the Adobe Type Dept could request this pretty quickly, it would take many months to actually happen - the this will sit at the bottom of the legal groups's priority list for a long time

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Bug#665334: Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 09:03:40PM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > > I don't think i understand your proposal, or how it fits into the > > resolution for #665334. could you explain in more detail? > > sorry for not making myself clear. > > You proposed to modify the fontforge UI

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Bug#665334: Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

Just a quick note to mention that all this flies miles over my head but I'm hapy to see that we might finally have a solution to this.and I will be glad to help in any way I can (which, for this issue, summarizes to "upload what has been cooked up"..something the dkg can do very well also).

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

On 08/30/2012 03:03 PM, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Hi Daniel, > >> I don't think i understand your proposal, or how it fits into the >> resolution for #665334. could you explain in more detail? > > sorry for not making myself clear. > > You proposed to modify the fontforge UI to request an Other

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

Hi Daniel, > I don't think i understand your proposal, or how it fits into the > resolution for #665334. could you explain in more detail? sorry for not making myself clear. You proposed to modify the fontforge UI to request an OtherSubrsFile when export fo Type1 format is selected. However, it

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

On 08/30/2012 03:00 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Am 29.08.2012 22:05, schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor: >>2) made the UI for type1 export default to requesting an >> OtherSubrsFile, and had it look in a standard place in the filesystem > > How about scripted export to Type1 format? I don't think

Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

Am 29.08.2012 22:05, schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor: 2) made the UI for type1 export default to requesting an OtherSubrsFile, and had it look in a standard place in the filesystem How about scripted export to Type1 format? - Fabian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.de

Bug#665334: proposed plan to resolve fontforge non-dfsg-freeness

Just wanted to note that in this message: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/2012-March/009937.html i proposed a way that we might be able to resolve the non-dfsg-free issue with fontforge (#665334): -- The code in question appears to be collected and emitted d

Bug#665334: Suggestion to Adobe

In a comment on this page announcing the Open Source release of the font Source Sans Pro I just suggested to Paul D. Hunt (Adobe) to have a look at this FontSource issue: http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html (comment currently is awaiting moderation) A solution of this

Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge

On 07/13/2012 11:34 AM, Hideki Yamane wrote: >> We could probably make a new dfsg-free "clean" upstream tarball that is >> still capable of building fontforge binaries by ripping out big chunks >> of this file (i haven't tried it yet), but i don't know what that would >> do to fontforge's abilit

Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge

Package: fontforge Severity: serious On 03/03/2012 07:48 AM, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > We have a package libimager-perl where we have had to remove a few > adobe-related test files as being non-DFSG. See > http://cpansearch.perl.org/src/TONYC/Imager-0.88/adobe.txt . > > However given a comment in t