Marco d'Itri wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Err, of course. That's why I ask. Does debian-legal think that a
document with a DFSG-free license and with sources available except for
the embedded fonts is DFSG-free or not?
I can't see anything in the DFSG which would forbid it, so it looks
free to me. With the note that the source files may need to be modified
to allow being processed with the free fonts present in Debian, but this
would not be a freeness issue.
I think that the interpretation is that the DFSG applies to the fonts
also. Indeed in this case, you cannot regenerate the same pdf file with
tools from main. Quite often I agree with you that the DFSG are
interpreted too strictly and does not refer the original view of Debian.
But in this situation, I cannot see how a document which is not
regenerable from entirely free stuff could be considered free.
By the way is it that difficult to the package maintener to regenerate
the document using free fonts? (the script texi2dvi do that nearly
magically without having worrying about LaTeX rerun, makeindex, etc...)
Olive
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
