Hi Nathan (and others), Quoting Nathan Willis (2020-02-09 20:30:52) > Version 3.8 of the SPDX License List is out (live at > https://spdx.org/licenses/ plus succinct release notes for 3.8 at > https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/releases/tag/v3.8 ...). > > For font-packaging fans, there is one change of note in this release, > which is that it is now possible to distinguish between OFL fonts that > include a reserved font name (RFN) and those that do not. > > To provide backward compatibility, the existing OFL license > identifiers (OFL-1.0 and OFL-1.1) are both still there and unaltered. > But there are also four new identifiers available: > > - OFL-1.0-RFN > - OFL-1.0-no-RFN > - OFL-1.1-RFN > - OFL-1.1-no-RFN > > So that any OFL package can specify whether or not there's an RFN that > applies, and (hopefully) tooling can check for that distinction and > prevent accidental RFN loss and/or violations! > > Obviously that won't happen overnight, but I for one am happy to see > that we can finally keep track of RFN information at the > license-compliance level; I think that it's going to make type > designers and package maintainers both sleep a little bit easier at > night. > > I'm also interested in figuring out what changes or machinery we need > to update to make this work smoothly in Debian, so if you have input > on that, please share! I expect to soon implement this change in licensecheck, which should hopefully help promote it to Debian packages in general. You are quite welcome to file a bugreport against licensecheck to track its inclusion (and to help remind me). See also https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools a list of other tools you might file wishlist bugs against to request their implementing this particular change. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature