Please sync liberation from debian-multimedia

There's a package waiting on REVU: http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=5182

It should be noted that Debian rejected these fonts, based on the license (GPL + restrictions).

http://<email address hidden>/msg36597.html

I took a look at these restrictions and they were quite carefully crafted indeed. RedHat seemingly wanted to create a situation where they can release something that passes as open source but that at the same time would not be approved of many distributions - leaving the font basically for themselves while getting some good PR.

All the "restrictions" do is state already obvious things (such as that using the font in a document does not GPL the document's contents) and they do not contradict the GPL itself. Unless if you read the licenses as unqualified zealot, which RedHat was perhaps counting on. There is no one single line in those restrictions that would make the fonts "non-distributable".

My 0.02$ is that Ubuntu project should make its own decision over the inclusion of these fonts.

Indeed.

Liberation would make a good addition to Ubuntu. These fonts should make it into Gutsy.

Also, Sans & Serif should be packaged. We should wait with Mono, because it's crappy in it's current state. Mono has no hinting, and it's O and 0 are easily confused.

Even though debian has rejected them, that doesn't mean we should.

I would like to point out that we do package the Larabie fonts. Which are nonfree altogether.

My point: We should package them either way. However, discussion is appropriate to determine whether they end up in main/universe/multiverse.

This would not pass REVU according to this:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/Reviewing#head-0b688d507e837332c6fdf2e3ef8c19093d8e0644

The REVU link is nuked.

Pascal de Bruijn has provided a Feisty package which I tested succesfully under Feisty (also attaching it here):
http://blog.pcode.nl/2007/05/11/redhats-gift/

The license.txt is very long, but most of it is just legalese, like "Software and each of its components, including the source code, documentation, appearance, structure and organization are owned by Red Hat", "To the maximum extent permitted under applicable law, the Software is provided and licensed "as is" [...] To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Red Hat or any Red Hat authorized dealer will not be liable to Client" (this is in addition to the warranty already in GPL), "If any provision of this agreement is held to be unenforceable, that shall not affect the enforceability of the remaining provisions.", etc.

The parts that matter are:

a. It's under GPLv2 +/- 2 exceptions.

Exception 1: "As a special exception, if you create a document which uses this font, and embed this font or unaltered portions of this font into the document, this font does not by itself cause the resulting document to be covered by the GNU General Public License..." This is the font exception the FSF recommends (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#FontException). Since it gives you rights beyond GPL, it's not a problem.

Exception 2: "As a further exception, any distribution of the object code of the Software in a physical product must provide you the right to access and modify the source code for the Software and to reinstall that modified version of the Software in object code form on the same physical product on which you received it." This is very similar to a GPLv3 restriction, and GPLv3 is approved for Ubuntu. Why Red Hat chose to add this clause in exception form to GPLv2, and only for a font, I don't know.

Red Hat could clear the air by removing Exception 2 and the legalese, and putting it under just GPLv2 or GPLv3 + font exception.

I don't believe the GPL 3 was out when these fonts were released. RedHat should look at how they license these fonts again. Is there any sort of bug filed at the redHat site for this?

Please mark as 'In Progress' again, if there's a package to review which can get uploaded.

Daniel,
I have uploaded a package, but can not change to In Progress.

You are not the bug assignee nor the maintainer of Ubuntu, and
therefore cannot edit this bug's status.

Thanks,
Mike
On Nov 23, 2007 12:56 AM, Daniel Holbach <email address hidden> wrote:
> Please mark as 'In Progress' again, if there's a package to review which
> can get uploaded.
>
> ** Changed in: ubuntu
> Status: In Progress => Triaged
>
>
> --
> [needs-packaging] Ubuntu needs the Liberation Fonts
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/113889
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

--
Mike Basinger
<email address hidden>
http://www.mikesplanet.net

Link: http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=ttf-liberation

There is a package on debian-multimedia.org.

http://debian-multimedia.org/pool/main/libe/liberation-fonts/

There is also a package present on http://www.rubixlinux.org/debian/ttf-liberation/.
Minor alterations need to be made for fontconfig replacements; I have done that here:

An updated version is waiting on REVU for reviews to review it. [1]
Another big problem is the licensing

[1] http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=ttf-liberation

Linux Mint, Rubix, and I'm sure many other dpkg-based distros have ttf-liberation packages already. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Getting a NEW package into Ubuntu still requires the standard REVU
processes. Just because "debs" (and source packages) are available
elsewhere, this does not mean that they meet debian (or Ubuntu) policies.

The only locations that we can "sync" from are Debian or occasionally Debian
Multimedia

On 12/28/07, maybeway36 <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Linux Mint, Rubix, and I'm sure many other dpkg-based distros have ttf-
> liberation packages already. No need to reinvent the wheel.
>
> --
> [needs-packaging] Ubuntu needs the Liberation Fonts
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/113889
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of
> Mythbuntu, which is a direct subscriber.
>

--
Mario Limonciello
<email address hidden>

Debian-multimedia has a package too.
http://www.debian-multimedia.org/dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/package/ttf-liberation.php

add the lines below to you /etc/apt/sources.list

# Corenominal PPA
deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/corenominal/ubuntu gutsy main
deb-src http://ppa.launchpad.net/corenominal/ubuntu gutsy main

On the terminal type:

$ wget http://crunchbang.org/misc/corenominal.key
$ gpg --import corenominal.key
$ gpg --export --armor FC2682F1 | sudo apt-key add -
$ apt-get update
$ sudo apt-get install ttf-liberation

good news: there is a new version of the liberation fonts that have completed hinting, and look beautiful. not sure if everyone knows this, but I've not seen any official announcement, so i thought i'd mention it.

bad news: the license has not changed, so the concerns raised here still remain.

see this bug report: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427791
specifically its attachment: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=290976

The fonts can be packaged now. The only question is which repository to put them in. If in doubt, we can place them in multiverse, and there's nothing to prevent moving them later.

Kernel - your package has a problem: it does not automatically replace Arial, Times, etc. in documents and Web pages. The debian-multimedia package does.

Can an archive admin fakesync these from debian-multimedia? They should be able to at least live in multiverse until the licensing is further sorted out.

Mario, you can upload it yourself. Just take our orig.tar.gz, debian's diff.gz, apply it, check that it works, and upload it with an -Xbuild1 changelog and version.

OH, sorry for the misunderstanding. That was a real sync, not a 'fake-sync'.

I synced it to multiverse now.

Unfortunately, the wrong version without full hinting was packaged (~600KB).

The version with correct hinting is currently only at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427791 (filesize 1.1M).

This bug was fixed in the package liberation-fonts - 1.0-0ubuntu1

---------------
liberation-fonts (1.0-0ubuntu1) hardy; urgency=low

  * New upstream version. (LP: #113889)
    - Only attached to Redhat #427791, not yet on
      liberation fonts website due to Redhat #433513
  * Update Maintainer to Ubuntu MOTU.

 -- Mario Limonciello <email address hidden> Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:49:36 -0500