Bug#477428: SIL OFL should be included in common-licenses
Gürkan Sengün <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Gürkan Sengün <email@example.com> writes:
>>> Since the Artistic, BSD, GPL, and LGPL licenses are included in
>>> /usr/share/common-licenses, would it be possible to get the SIL OFL
>>> included as well?
>> It's in many respects better to include the license directly in
>> debian/copyright, since it keeps all the legal information in one
>> place. common-licenses is primarily an optimization of archive space
>> and disk space so that we don't include thousands of copies of licenses
>> like the GNU GPL.
>> Because of this, the primary criteria for inclusion in common-licenses
>> is how widespread the license is within Debian. Usually it needs to be
>> used in at least hundreds of packages before being considered eligible
>> for inclusion.
>> How many packages currently use the SIL OFL? I don't appear to have
>> any installed on my local system.
> I see, well, here it's only about 10 or so:
> grep "SIL OPEN" /usr/share/doc/ttf*/copyright | wc -l
I think that's a strong argument for not including SIL OFL in
common-licenses at this time.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>