[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#678746: desktop-base: Joy theme is a mix of incompatibly-licensed works


I updated the Joy wiki page (http://wiki.debian.org/DebianArt/Themes/Joy) to 
include installer alternative pictures that you asked. These copyright trouble 
about the Debian logo is quiet messy, so I hope the pictures I've made match 
your request.

The archive contains 4 sets of png/svg :
- No text, only the swirl logo
- Free typo, Linux Libertine
- Debian typo
- Debian typo under the swirl logo

The license problem is out of my league, so I let you choose the picture you 
want according to its use. The no-text picture is my first choice, but feel 
free to use the ones with the "Debian" text.

If I haven't done what you asked right, do not hesitate to tell me.


Le lundi 25 juin 2012 22:03:12 Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 06:57:03PM +0200, Adrien Aubourg wrote:
> > As I've been asked to write "Debian" on the installer picture, could
> > be there any license trouble to do so ?
> Adrien, if it's not too much work, could you please prepare two
> different versions of the installer picture, one with the official
> (currently) non-free typeface of the "with debian" logo at
> http://www.debian.org/logos/ and one with a DFSG-free typeface.
> I'm still positive we can do the relicensing of the currently non-free
> typeface in time for Wheezy. But clearly not in time for the freeze. So
> if there could be two versions of it, we can choose between either:
> 1) ship now the non-free version and have an RC bug against it for the
>    non-freeness
> 2) ship now the free version and ask for a freeze exception to include
>    the official typeface later on. *If* the only difference is in a
>    difference typeface in an otherwise identical image, then hopefully
>    the risks of inducing regressions will be minimized.
> Choosing among these two options is probably better left to the
> desktop-base maintainers + the release team.  I guess that (2) is a more
> conservative choice anyhow, that leaves us a releasable desktop-base
> package even if the relicensing fails.
> Cheers.
> PS I just came back after 5 days of (Debian-related) traveling and I
>    still have to catch up with -desktop traffic

Reply to: