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

Re: OFL license analysis

don@debian.org wrote:

>What you're trying to prevent is clear, it's just not necessary to use
>a license to do this. Consider the following: Debian decides to
>distribute works containing your font. The original upstream
>disappears. A bug is discovered in the font, and Debian needs to fix
>it. We can no longer distribute a fixed version of the font that
>interoperates seamlessly with existing user's documents because we're
>required to change the name of the font.
Yes, and this is considered a feature.
Usually existing documents should not break because a font is changed,
even if this fixes a bug.

>In the case where we introduce a change that breaks the end-user
>documents, end-users are (hopefully) intelligent enough to realize
>that they've gotten a version that is broken, and go about tracking
>down the version that they actually want.
You cannot install at the same time two fonts with the same name, and
anyway you should not force users to do this.


Reply to: