#35829: Update/Fix Font Awesome icons
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: stefan6419846 | Owner: (none)
Type: | Status: new
Cleanup/optimization |
Component: contrib.admin | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 1
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by Natalia Bidart):
* type: Bug => Cleanup/optimization
* ui_ux: 0 => 1
Comment:
Hello stefan6419846, thank you for your ticket. I'm also not a layer, and
I don't have clarity on what we really need to do here. Some replies
inline:
Replying to [ticket:35829 stefan6419846]:
> From reading the provided information, these files were originally
created by the Font Awesome project, although being converted to
standalone SVG files by some third-party. As far as I can see, they have
received some modifications for Django to set some other color for
example.
I agree with this conclusion as far as I can see. Though note that the
standalone SVG files do seem to be licensed under MIT as per
https://github.com/Rush/Font-Awesome-SVG-PNG/?
> * Splitting the big SVG file as done by ''Font-Awesome-SVG-PNG'' might
be considered derivative work with a new name per OFL-1.1 and at least is
covered by the weak copyleft effect of the OFL-1.1. The MIT LICENSE file
provided in the directory is clearly wrong here.
Wouldn't this be an issue that https://github.com/Rush/Font-Awesome-SVG-
PNG has to deal with?
> * Changing the color of individual files or re-arranging them can more
likely be considered derivative work, usually requiring using a different
name under the terms of the OFL-1.1 and applying the OFL-1.1 to these
files.
I'm not seeing name matching between what we have in Django and what I
have downloaded from Font Awesome. Could you please provide a few specific
examples?
> 1. Update Font Awesome to the latest version. Desktop releases for
version 6.6.0 already provide individual SVG files which actually have a
license comment inside as well.
> 2. Update the README and LICENSE file accordingly to indeed include the
correct license text, id est the OFL-1.1 one. The README ideally documents
which changes were done to which original version.
I don't object with this proposal, it feels like a good refresh though it
would need more work than that. We'd need the proper coloring and resizing
to be applied, and potentially a re-take of all the admin screenshots used
in the docs.
If we eventually accept this ticket, would you be able to help with this?
Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/35829#comment:4>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107019277a01bc9-a3edf6c0-391f-4f1e-a9ba-3091079afefa-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
