I hope this issue can be resolved eventually. The non-free status of the font in Debian is preventing me from including it in a package I'm working on as part of my dayjob, and it appears there are multiple licensing inconsistencies that prevent it from being used as-is. Is there anything in particular that would keep Canonical from relicensing this under the SIL Open Font License?
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Documentation Packages, which is subscribed to fonts-ubuntu in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/769874 Title: Naming restrictions in UFL considered non-free by Debian Status in Ubuntu Font Family: Invalid Status in Ubuntu Font Licence: Incomplete Status in fonts-ubuntu package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in Debian: Fix Released Bug description: The Debian ftpmaster consider the Ubuntu Font License to be non-free: "After discussion in the FTP Team, we consider the font naming restrictions to restrictive and unclear for main." http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts- devel/2011-April/006515.html Debian ITP: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=603157 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-font-family/+bug/769874/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~documentation-packages Post to : documentation-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~documentation-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
