From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#32916: font-awesome v5 build scripts are not free Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2018 11:19:00 +0200 Message-ID: <871s96ysqj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20181002191330.GA12909@jasmine.lan> <87ftxmltaf.fsf@netris.org> <87zhvuk9hg.fsf@gnu.org> <871s96lfmi.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56022) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g7znj-0005eY-Kg for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2018 05:20:11 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g7znf-0007JM-6Q for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2018 05:20:06 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:60309) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g7zne-0007Io-Ph for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2018 05:20:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g7zne-0001bO-HH for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2018 05:20:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <871s96lfmi.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Wed, 03 Oct 2018 20:28:21 -0400") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Mark H Weaver Cc: 32916@debbugs.gnu.org Hello Mark, Mark H Weaver skribis: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: [...] >> I don=E2=80=99t have a clear opinion on =E2=80=98font-awesome=E2=80=99 y= et, but I have some >> comments: (1) only some of our font packages are built from source >> (though I think we should do more of that), (2) the font might be >> considered =E2=80=9Cnon-functional data=E2=80=9D rather than software un= der the FSDG, > > The GNU FSDG states: > > License Rules > > =E2=80=9CInformation for practical use=E2=80=9D includes software, doc= umentation, > fonts, and other data that has direct functional applications. It > does not include artistic works that have an aesthetic (rather than > functional) purpose, or statements of opinion or judgment. > > All information for practical use in a free distribution must be > available in source form. (=E2=80=9CSource=E2=80=9D means the form of= the > information that is preferred for making changes to it.) > > I think it's reasonably clear that the first paragraph above refers to > the distinction between functional and non-functional data, and it > specifically lists "fonts" as an example of the first category. It also > associates the terms "functional" and "for practical use" with "fonts". Indeed, I had overlooked this paragraph. I agree with your interpretation. > The section on "Non-functional Data" begins with: > > Data that isn't functional, that doesn't do a practical job, is more > of an adornment to the system's software than a part of it. [...] > > Note the two terms "functional", and "does a practical job" which > essentially means the same thing as "for practical use". These two > terms are specifically associated with "fonts" above, and are > contraindicators for "Non-functional Data". Yes, though when I read this part, I thought to myself that non-essential fonts could be regarded as an adornment to the system. (My understanding is also that game artwork is often viewed as non-functional data under the FSDG, even though I=E2=80=99d personally cons= ider that it =E2=80=9Cdoes a practical job=E2=80=9D, much more than an optional = font.) Anyway the =E2=80=9CLicense Rules=E2=80=9D paragraph above makes it clear, = I think, that fonts may not be treated as non-functional data. Thanks for clarifying! Ludo=E2=80=99.