This is going to be pretty common for anything that uses the bootstrap CSS framework,
since glyphicons is bundled as part of it. I do not see much benefit from packaging this
separately, especially as the license for the glyphicons halflings font included with
bootstrap is MIT, but CC-BY from the upstream (
glyphicons.org).
Stefan Nuxoll <stefan@nuxoll.eu.org<mailto:stefan@nuxoll.eu.org>>
________________________________
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 19:55:53 -0700
Subject: Packaged fonts? (and regular audits?)
From: davejohansen(a)gmail.com
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
During the review of cppformat, it was pointed out that it contained a
font that should be removed because it's packaged with Fedora (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1216279#c3 ). While working
on resolving this, I was looking into what package provided this font
so I could add the appropriate Requires to get the font and noticed
that quite a few packages also include this font:
yum provides "*/glyphicons-halflings-regular.ttf"
Is this ok? And if not, then is there some way that a set of
fedora-review style audits could be run on existing packages to verify
that these sorts of things didn't accidentally slip through the
original review or were introduced in an update without being noticed?
Thanks,
Dave
-- devel mailing list devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of
Conduct:
http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct