On 07/10/16 09:25, Gary wrote:
On 06/10/16 18:54, Dammina Sahabandu wrote:
Hi Gary,

Thank you for the positive feedback :) And I agree with mentioning the library in the NOTICE file. As we do not maintain a THIRD_PARTY_LICENSE file, legally that would be enough AFAIK. However I'm not exactly clear about the role of .rat-ignore file. Is it the configuration file for defining files to be ignored when running the Apache Rat tool?

Thanks,
Dammina

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Gary <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On 03/10/16 19:46, Dammina Sahabandu wrote:

        Hi Devs,

        To provide a better user experience I propose to use icons
        from Font
        Awesome icon library [1]. At the moment Apache Bloodhound
        utilize the
        limited set of icons provided by Bootstrap glyphicons. However
        Font Awesome
        provide a wider range of icons that we can effectively utilize
        and make the
        UI better.

        Font Awesome library is licensed under MIT license [2].
        Therefore I don't
        think there are any legal barriers. And I hope it will be a
        cool UX
        improvement for the next release of the project. Please share
        your view on
        this.

        [1] http://fontawesome.io/icons/ <http://fontawesome.io/>
        [2] http://fontawesome.io/license/

        Thanks,
        Dammina


    Sounds good to me - obviously the normal things apply about
    ensuring that we acknowledge in appropriate places (the NOTICE
    file I believe) that this component is included and under which
    license. There may also be changes required in the .rat-ignore
    file but we can work that out later.

    Cheers,
        Gary



Yes, that is right. There is no particular need to worry about it immediately though. I'll check at some point if the automated build to check licenses is actually running.

Cheers,
    Gary


Looking again at their licensing, it is probably also worth checking the compatibility of the font license - http://scripts.sil.org/OFL - as I think that might be the way that the icons are delivered rather than from an image. To be fair, I did not look that hard so I could easily be wrong and there is a fair chance that it will be fine.

Cheers,
    Gary

Reply via email to