I have been investigating bug 536920, which is a crash in fontlint when running against a font file included in poker3d-data.
This font file is neurpoli.ttf, which turns out to be one of the Larabie fonts. Larabie fonts cannot be packaged because of the restrictions on modification:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Bad_Licenses_4
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
But actually, it seems that poker3d-data couldn't have this font separated out anyway.
Should I be raising a bug against poker3d-data along the lines of "you need to remove non-free font from package"?
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Paul Flo Williams paul@frixxon.co.uk wrote:
I have been investigating bug 536920, which is a crash in fontlint when running against a font file included in poker3d-data. This font file is neurpoli.ttf, which turns out to be one of the Larabie fonts. Larabie fonts cannot be packaged because of the restrictions on modification:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Bad_Licenses_4
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
But actually, it seems that poker3d-data couldn't have this font separated out anyway.
Should I be raising a bug against poker3d-data along the lines of "you need to remove non-free font from package"?
My thought as a bugzapper is to re-open #477443 and set to the version you found the bug in and set information request maintainer. Going by # 477443 information only I see fast track non-responsive maintainer in this bugs future.
Edward (tk009)
On 07/16/2010 08:48 AM, TK009 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Paul Flo Williams paul@frixxon.co.uk wrote:
I have been investigating bug 536920, which is a crash in fontlint when running against a font file included in poker3d-data. This font file is neurpoli.ttf, which turns out to be one of the Larabie fonts. Larabie fonts cannot be packaged because of the restrictions on modification:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Bad_Licenses_4
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
But actually, it seems that poker3d-data couldn't have this font separated out anyway.
Should I be raising a bug against poker3d-data along the lines of "you need to remove non-free font from package"?
My thought as a bugzapper is to re-open #477443 and set to the version you found the bug in and set information request maintainer. Going by # 477443 information only I see fast track non-responsive maintainer in this bugs future.
If you reopen that bug (or open a new bug), please block it against FE-Legal.
~spot
TK, Spot,
My thought as a bugzapper is to re-open #477443 and set to the version you found the bug in and set information request maintainer. Going by # 477443 information only I see fast track non-responsive maintainer in this bugs future.
I don't think I am able to reopen this bug, or I don't see how.
If you reopen that bug (or open a new bug), please block it against FE-Legal.
I have filed a new bug, 615347, blocking FE-Legal as requested.
Cheers, Paul
Le 16/07/2010 11:09, Paul Flo Williams a écrit :
I imagine that Nicolas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX:
Actually one of the main reasons for separating fonts in sub-packages (apart from user convenience) is to force package maintainers to investigate a little the licensing of the fonts they push in Fedora, and identify legal problems (sadly, I think the majority of the fonts identified this way had to be retired, either because of legal problems, or because they were old buggy versions of fonts we already shipped in other packages).
If someone want to look at the wontfixes that resulted from the initial mass-bugzilla filling, I'm sure there are still problems lurking (I don't really have the time or energy to do so right now).
Another way is just to point repo-font-audit (which is in fontpackages-tools) to a public rawhide repo, and it will generate an up-to-date report.
BTW Thanks a lot for your current activity fonts-side Paul, it could not come at a better moment
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:09:37AM +0100, Paul Flo Williams wrote:
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
I just went through all bugs blocking F11-new-font-rules that have been closed recently through the bugzapper EOL procedure and reopened those which are clearly still valid.
A rather large number of packages never had a single reply from one of the maintainers.
Do we have any provenpackages who volunteer to be CCed on bugs that have patches attached? (Not that there currently are any such bugs with patches but reopening I have found some low hanging fruits which I'm planning to look at in the future).
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:35:26 +0200 Sven Lankes sven@lank.es wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:09:37AM +0100, Paul Flo Williams wrote:
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
I just went through all bugs blocking F11-new-font-rules that have been closed recently through the bugzapper EOL procedure and reopened those which are clearly still valid.
A rather large number of packages never had a single reply from one of the maintainers.
Sad. ;(
Do we have any provenpackages who volunteer to be CCed on bugs that have patches attached? (Not that there currently are any such bugs with patches but reopening I have found some low hanging fruits which I'm planning to look at in the future).
We should be careful here... if the packagers are really gone and no longer maintaining we should orphan the packages so people can take them over, not keep drive by maintaining them without being very involved. :) IMHO.
kevin
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:35:26 +0200 Sven Lankes sven@lank.es wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:09:37AM +0100, Paul Flo Williams wrote:
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
I just went through all bugs blocking F11-new-font-rules that have been closed recently through the bugzapper EOL procedure and reopened those which are clearly still valid.
A rather large number of packages never had a single reply from one of the maintainers.
Sad. ;(
Do we have any provenpackages who volunteer to be CCed on bugs that have patches attached? (Not that there currently are any such bugs with patches but reopening I have found some low hanging fruits which I'm planning to look at in the future).
We should be careful here... if the packagers are really gone and no longer maintaining we should orphan the packages so people can take them over, not keep drive by maintaining them without being very involved. :) IMHO.
I think those packages whose spec's need to be re-written should block F14Target and volunteer's are welcome to post patches/fix them. Recently I come across few packages which need to follow current fonts packaging guidelines. I start working on those but found openfontlibrary.org is almost broken and for those fonts it is upstream. I am now searching those fonts if have some other publisher. If i will find any other foundry then will use and import it in Fedora otherwise my suggestion will be to retire those packages whose upstream are gone now.
Parag.
Hi,
On 07/18/2010 11:51 AM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Kevin Fenzikevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:35:26 +0200 Sven Lankessven@lank.es wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:09:37AM +0100, Paul Flo Williams wrote:
I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since closed WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443
I just went through all bugs blocking F11-new-font-rules that have been closed recently through the bugzapper EOL procedure and reopened those which are clearly still valid.
A rather large number of packages never had a single reply from one of the maintainers.
Sad. ;(
Do we have any provenpackages who volunteer to be CCed on bugs that have patches attached? (Not that there currently are any such bugs with patches but reopening I have found some low hanging fruits which I'm planning to look at in the future).
We should be careful here... if the packagers are really gone and no longer maintaining we should orphan the packages so people can take them over, not keep drive by maintaining them without being very involved. :) IMHO.
I think those packages whose spec's need to be re-written should block F14Target and volunteer's are welcome to post patches/fix them. Recently I come across few packages which need to follow current fonts packaging guidelines. I start working on those but found openfontlibrary.org is almost broken and for those fonts it is upstream. I am now searching those fonts if have some other publisher. If i will find any other foundry then will use and import it in Fedora otherwise my suggestion will be to retire those packages whose upstream are gone now.
Unless I read the thread wrong openfontlibrary.org will return. Also I see no reason to drop packages just because there upstream is gone. Esp. for something like a font. If its a nice font and reasonably complete what sort of maintenance would you expect from upstream ? I mean once Rembrand had finished the Night Watch, it was well finished. I don't see how a font is much different.
Regards,
Hans