From: Marcus B. <ma...@be...> - 2006-07-12 10:24:34
|
Hi, apparently there is a licensing problem with some parts of Tikiwiki. I need to resolve this in order to get Tikiwiki into Debian. Any comments? Marcus |
From: <bou...@no...> - 2006-07-12 20:41:41
|
Marcus Better a =E9crit : >Hi, > >apparently there is a licensing problem with some parts of Tikiwiki. I >need to resolve this in order to get Tikiwiki into Debian. Any comments? > =20 > we don't need that font , should be optionnal tom >Marcus > =20 > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= - > > Sujet: > Bug#377943: tikiwiki: distributing "Houndtime" infringes copyright and=20 > violates policy 2.2.1 > Exp=E9diteur: > Filipus Klutiero <ch...@ho...> > Date: > Wed, 12 Jul 2006 00:01:38 -0400 > Destinataire: > Debian Bug Tracking System <su...@bu...> > > Destinataire: > Debian Bug Tracking System <su...@bu...> > > >Package: tikiwiki >Version: 1.9.4-1 >Severity: serious >Justification: Policy 2.2.1 > >lib/graph2/ARIALDB.TTF contains a font named "Houndtime". This file is >binary-identical to the Houndtim.ttf file contained in the zip archive >at http://moorstation.org/typoasis/designers/gort/fonts/houndtme.zip > >The ttf file's description reads "A standard "respectable" typeface". >The ttf file's copyright reads "Copyright (c) Bree Gorton at the Font >Farm, 2001. All rights reserved." > >The only permissive notice I found is in the other file of the zip >archive, Read-Me.txt, which reads "This font was made by The Font Farm, >it's free to use." > >As I see nothing that would allow redistribution, I assume that Tiki is >infringing Bree Gorton's copyright by redistributing this file. >As I see nothing that would allow modification of the font, I assume >that including this file in main violates policy 2.2.1. > >If you believe that Tiki distributes the file legally but can't prove >it, you may contact upstream's Florian Gleixner who committed this file.= Otherwise, it seems that replacing that file by a Free equivalent should= do. > >Note that there's still a good job to do to get all the borrowed code >properly acknowledged in debian/copyright. There's also IMO a huge job >to do to get the copyright on all the borrowed images. I guess you'll >have to request upstream's help with this if you want to get this packag= e in testing >sometime. > > =20 > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------= - >Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security= ? >Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job e= asier >Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geroni= mo >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D= 121642 > =20 > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Tikiwiki-devel mailing list >Tik...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel > =20 > |
From: mose <mo...@ti...> - 2006-07-12 21:13:28
|
le Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:41:35PM +0200 par bou...@no... : > Marcus Better a =E9crit : >=20 > >Hi, > > > >apparently there is a licensing problem with some parts of Tikiwiki. I > >need to resolve this in order to get Tikiwiki into Debian. Any comment= s? > > =20 > > > we don't need that font , should be optionnal - lib/graph2 seems to have been a preparation of replacement for the stats graph, by redflo in 2004. But it never have been included.=20 We probably can remove that. But another topic is more problematic, it's about the content of img/ dir. It's a generous collection of many icons, from which few are actually used. And the origin of those icons is not certain about their condition of use. Most have been borrowed to other web applications, actually. This is a blocking point, apparently, to get into debian official collection. I suggest we move unused icons in a Mod named icons_extra, like we did for avatars (well, some of them), and that we replace used icons with explicitely free icons (licence-wise) by just designing new ones or finding appropriate icons collection. What is general feeling about this ? cheers, mose > tom >=20 > >Marcus > > =20 > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > > > Sujet: > > Bug#377943: tikiwiki: distributing "Houndtime" infringes copyright an= d=20 > > violates policy 2.2.1 > > Exp=E9diteur: > > Filipus Klutiero <ch...@ho...> > > Date: > > Wed, 12 Jul 2006 00:01:38 -0400 > > Destinataire: > > Debian Bug Tracking System <su...@bu...> > > > > Destinataire: > > Debian Bug Tracking System <su...@bu...> > > > > > >Package: tikiwiki > >Version: 1.9.4-1 > >Severity: serious > >Justification: Policy 2.2.1 > > > >lib/graph2/ARIALDB.TTF contains a font named "Houndtime". This file is > >binary-identical to the Houndtim.ttf file contained in the zip archive > >at http://moorstation.org/typoasis/designers/gort/fonts/houndtme.zip > > > >The ttf file's description reads "A standard "respectable" typeface". > >The ttf file's copyright reads "Copyright (c) Bree Gorton at the Font > >Farm, 2001. All rights reserved." > > > >The only permissive notice I found is in the other file of the zip > >archive, Read-Me.txt, which reads "This font was made by The Font Farm= , > >it's free to use." > > > >As I see nothing that would allow redistribution, I assume that Tiki i= s > >infringing Bree Gorton's copyright by redistributing this file. > >As I see nothing that would allow modification of the font, I assume > >that including this file in main violates policy 2.2.1. > > > >If you believe that Tiki distributes the file legally but can't prove > >it, you may contact upstream's Florian Gleixner who committed this fil= e. Otherwise, it seems that replacing that file by a Free equivalent shou= ld do. > > > >Note that there's still a good job to do to get all the borrowed code > >properly acknowledged in debian/copyright. There's also IMO a huge job > >to do to get the copyright on all the borrowed images. I guess you'll > >have to request upstream's help with this if you want to get this pack= age in testing > >sometime. > > > > =20 > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------------= -- > > > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > >Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securi= ty? > >Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job= easier > >Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Gero= nimo > >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&da= t=3D121642 > > =20 > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------------= -- > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Tikiwiki-devel mailing list > >Tik...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel > > =20 > > >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= -- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securit= y? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job = easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geron= imo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat= =3D121642 > _______________________________________________ > Tikiwiki-devel mailing list > Tik...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel |
From: danny s. <da...@or...> - 2006-07-12 22:15:49
|
On 12/07/06, mose <mo...@ti...> wrote: > le Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:41:35PM +0200 par bou...@no... : > > Marcus Better a =E9crit : > > > > >Hi, > > > > > >apparently there is a licensing problem with some parts of Tikiwiki. I > > >need to resolve this in order to get Tikiwiki into Debian. Any comment= s? > > > > > > > > we don't need that font , should be optionnal > > - lib/graph2 seems to have been a preparation of replacement for the > stats graph, by redflo in 2004. But it never have been included. > We probably can remove that. > > But another topic is more problematic, it's about the content of img/ > dir. It's a generous collection of many icons, from which few are > actually used. And the origin of those icons is not certain about > their condition of use. Most have been borrowed to other web > applications, actually. > > This is a blocking point, apparently, to get into debian official > collection. I suggest we move unused icons in a Mod named icons_extra, > like we did for avatars (well, some of them), and that we replace used > icons with explicitely free icons (licence-wise) by just designing new > ones or finding appropriate icons collection. > > What is general feeling about this ? That sounds like an excellent plan to me on both counts. The font should be easily replaceable with a free licensed one too if it is at all still required. Danny --=20 Danny Staple MBCS OrionRobots http://orionrobots.co.uk/blogs/dannystaple (Full contact details available through website) |
From: mose <mo...@ti...> - 2006-07-12 22:50:12
|
le Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:15:45PM +0100 par danny staple : > On 12/07/06, mose <mo...@ti...> wrote: > > le Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:41:35PM +0200 par bou...@no... : > > > Marcus Better a =E9crit : > > > > > > >Hi, > > > > > > > >apparently there is a licensing problem with some parts of Tikiwik= i. I > > > >need to resolve this in order to get Tikiwiki into Debian. Any com= ments? > > > > > > > > > > > we don't need that font , should be optionnal > > > > - lib/graph2 seems to have been a preparation of replacement for the > > stats graph, by redflo in 2004. But it never have been included. > > We probably can remove that. > > > > But another topic is more problematic, it's about the content of img/ > > dir. It's a generous collection of many icons, from which few are > > actually used. And the origin of those icons is not certain about > > their condition of use. Most have been borrowed to other web > > applications, actually. > > > > This is a blocking point, apparently, to get into debian official > > collection. I suggest we move unused icons in a Mod named icons_extra= , > > like we did for avatars (well, some of them), and that we replace use= d > > icons with explicitely free icons (licence-wise) by just designing ne= w > > ones or finding appropriate icons collection. > > > > What is general feeling about this ? >=20 > That sounds like an excellent plan to me on both counts. The font > should be easily replaceable with a free licensed one too if it is at > all still required. - this font was not required, but if you know free replacement for the content of lib/pdflib/fonts (where fonts are copyright Adobe), you are welcome to process. Otherwise we'll remove them as well (and then remove the export in pdf feature, which would be a pity even if that feature is still not perfect). If anyone has pointers to clean icons (with explicit licence lgpl or bsd type), please share your sources :)=20 I'll begin to remove all unused icons I can stumble upon, feel free to join the iconocide. Grep is your friend. About icons for replacing used ones, I suggest we stick on png or jpg and avoid gifs (whose compression algorythm is still patented in some places in the world). After that shot, I think we'll have a tikiwiki software really conform to what it pretends, and we would even be able to be accepted on savanah ;) cheers, mose |
From: Vijay A. <wy...@pa...> - 2006-07-12 23:30:32
|
On Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:51 PM, mose wrote: > If anyone has pointers to clean icons (with explicit licence lgpl > or bsd type), please share your sources :) Try http://www.famfamfam.com/ Cheers, Vijay Aswadhati (a.k.a Swayambhu) |
From: danny s. <da...@or...> - 2006-07-13 06:32:07
|
On 12/07/06, mose <mo...@ti...> wrote: > le Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:15:45PM +0100 par danny staple : > > That sounds like an excellent plan to me on both counts. The font > > should be easily replaceable with a free licensed one too if it is at > > all still required. > > - this font was not required, but if you know free replacement for the > content of lib/pdflib/fonts (where fonts are copyright Adobe), you > are welcome to process. Otherwise we'll remove them as well (and then > remove the export in pdf feature, which would be a pity even if that > feature is still not perfect). Mose, with respect to PDF fonts, what is used in other FOSS CMS systems like mambo and drupal with PDF export? I am sure that is where we should be looking. Danny -- Danny Staple MBCS OrionRobots http://orionrobots.co.uk/blogs/dannystaple (Full contact details available through website) |