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

DFSG + Hack typeface license with transition to proposed new source file build in Debian package

Our fonts (Hack - https://github.com/source-foundry/Hack) are currently released through the Debian package manager (package maintainer Paride Legovini) from our Github repository as binaries that are compiled + hinted by the project author team. As of our upcoming v3.0 release of the fonts, we are transitioning to a new scripted compilation process that will allow redistribution of these binaries as built directly from the source files by redistribution teams.  There are multiple reasons for this, but one has been a request by a number of Linux distro package maintainers to abide by guidelines that include the DFSG.

Paride asked me if there will be an issue with the release of the Hack font files through this scripted source compilation process on Debian and Ubuntu distros based upon the language in our dual license structure (admittedly complex due to the fact that these fonts are a fork from Bitstream Vera Sans Mono that had a license which predates the current FLOSS licenses in use for typefaces).  I believe that his concern is with the Reserved Font Name stipulation in our Hack Open Font License and whether there are conflicts for your group.

I received a request from a user to contact this mailing list for further information and to clarify the language in our license against your guidelines for software redistribution.  We fully support and encourage this form of redistribution of our fonts so long as the packages are compiled with the validated build tooling (including appropriate dependency versioning) that we use in the repository builds that are intended for release to the end user.

If there is license language that seems to indicate otherwise or prohibits your capacity to distribute the font files in this fashion, I would greatly appreciate any feedback that you would be willing to provide about how we can modify the licensing so that this is no longer the case.

Our license is available here: https://github.com/source-foundry/Hack/blob/master/LICENSE.md

The original issue report thread where this was raised by Paride is here: https://github.com/source-foundry/Hack/issues/255#issuecomment-316414866 

It would be ideal to have this conversation in a Github issue report on the repository (the above report or a new one if appropriate) if you are willing.  Assuming that is not possible given the size of this list, I will try to summarize the outcome of the conversation for Paride and our users, then point a link to the debian-legal archives so that we have a record of the discussion.

Thanks in advance for your help.  I greatly appreciate your assistance.

Chris Simpkins

Reply to: