Hi guys,
On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 19:56 -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
Note: I will abide by whatever decision is reached
The ESC discussed this precise issue in the past; and made a decision
not to include the Ubuntu font, and because of that, this is the status
quo today. No doubt someone clever could dig out the minutes on that.
If we want to re-discuss it - since the issue is a legal /
advertising / bikeshed-cum-flame-bait issue. I'd recommend we re-discuss
it in an ESC call preferably after 4.0 / FOSDEM. The more concise,
accurate and detailed a write-up we have for all the fonts we currently
ship the better the decision we can take. Anyone griping about this
should build better data: Name, License, coverage, binary-size, hinting
etc. One potential solution might be to remove other non-free fonts (if
indeed we are bundling them) - OTOH - there is AFAICS no need for a
hasty conclusion on this: we can tweak this for 4.0.1 and/or 3.6.<next>
as/when necessary.
but let's not pretend that this is not, for all practical purpose, an
advertising clause.
ATB,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
Context
Re: [Libreoffice-ux-advise] including Ubuntu fonts in Windows/OSX installers · Rene Engelhard
Re: including Ubuntu fonts in Windows/OSX installers · Stefan Knorr (Astron)
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.