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

Bug#477428: marked as done (SIL OFL should be included in common-licenses)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:38:33 -0700
with message-id <87sk3hcy52.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
and subject line Re: Bug#477428: SIL OFL should be included in common-licenses
has caused the Debian Bug report #477428,
regarding SIL OFL should be included in common-licenses
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
477428: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477428
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: base-files
Version: 4.0.3
Severity: wishlist

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?

Version 1.1
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/render_download.php?site_id=nrsi&format=file&media_id=OFL_plaintext&filename=OFL.txt
and 1.0
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/render_download.php?site_id=nrsi&format=file&media_id=OFL10_plaintext&filename=OFL10.txt

Yours,
Gürkan

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:

> I did a scan of the archive yesterday looking for usage of licenses that
> were proposed for common-licenses, and the results for these licenses
> were:

> SIL OFL 1.0              12
> SIL OFL 1.1              55

> As mentioned above, I don't think this is enough usage to warrant
> inclusion in common-licenses.  I'm therefore marking this bug as
> rejected, although it will remain open for a while in case anyone else
> disagrees and wants to make a case for their inclusion.

There has been no further discussion, so I'm closing this bug accordingly.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

--- End Message ---
Reply to: