Florian Weimer writes ("Re: DFSG + Hack typeface license with transition to proposed new source file build in Debian package"): > Ian Jackson: > > Debian is not likely to accept a restriction on modifying glyphs. We > > consider that Debian (and its downstreams and users) must be free to > > make changes - even changes that upstreams disapprove of. > > We have historically accepted restrictions like these: > | The programs for computer Modern are in the public domain, and readers > | may freely generate and hand-tune their own fonts using the algorithms > | of this book. However, use of the names is restricted: Any fonts > | whose names cmr10 or cmbx12 or ... are identical to the standard font > | names of this book should be fully compatible with the fonts defined > | here; i.e., fonts with the same names are supposed to have precisely > | the same character coding schemes and precisely the same font metric > | files.
I don't think this is very illuminating for the Hack typeface. The problematic restriction I said Debian was not likely to accept was one which forbids, entirely, the creation of derivative modified glyphs. That is not present in the text above. A complete discussion of the status of the TeX font licence is outside the scope of this memo :-). Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.