Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Sat, 4 Nov 2023 07:53:07 +0700
From:   Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Documentation <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
        David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, James Seo <james@equiv.tech>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
        Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>,
        Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>,
        linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org, Richard Fontana <rfontana@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] LICENSES: Add SIL Open Font License 1.1
Message-ID: <ZUWV88wRf9suUQfH@debian.me>
References: <20231102120053.30630-1-bagasdotme@gmail.com>
 <20231102120053.30630-2-bagasdotme@gmail.com>
 <2023110222-renewed-monologue-008e@gregkh>
 <ZUSrOKDuvcSL6gOH@debian.me>
 <2023110317-unhealthy-playable-d5d6@gregkh>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="afQLVpNKUr+IwTwT"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2023110317-unhealthy-playable-d5d6@gregkh>
Precedence: bulk


--afQLVpNKUr+IwTwT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 09:49:54AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 03:11:36PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 03:06:19PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 07:00:43PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > > >  LICENSES/dual/OFL-1.1 | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
++++
> > >=20
> > > You add this license, but then never actually reference it in the lat=
er
> > > changes, so it's going to be very confusing as to why it is here.  Any
> > > way to add it to the font files themselves so our checker tools can
> > > handle this properly?
> >=20
> > There is TTF name string ID called "License". For example, on IBM Plex =
Sans,
> > the string value is:
> >=20
> > ```
> > This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version=
 1.1. This license is available with a FAQ at: http://scripts.sil.org/OFL
> > ```
> >=20
> > Checking that string requires scripting fontforge, and since the string=
 value
> > may differ (but has the same license) across different fonts, scripting=
 it
> > can be non-trivial.
>=20
> And is that in the files you added?  They are binary so it's hard to
> determine this :(

Yes.

>=20
> > >=20
> > > And, it's not going to work as a dual-license, you can't just suddenly
> > > dual-license those font files, right?
> >=20
> > I was thinking of putting OFL in LICENSES/exceptions instead due to this
> > nature.
>=20
> Yes, it can not be a dual one.

That's right!

What about just saying below in the CSS file that includes the fonts?

```
=2E..
/* Some cool fonts are licensed under OFL 1.1, see
 * LICENSES/exceptions/OFL-1.1 for more information. */
=2E..
```
> > > > +Usage-Guide:
> > > > +  Do NOT use this license for code, but it's acceptable for fonts =
(where the
> > > > +  license is specifically written for them). It's best to use it t=
ogether
> > > > +  with a GPL2 compatible license using "OR", as OFL-1.1 texts proc=
essed by
> > > > +  the kernel's build system might combine it with content taken fr=
om more
> > > > +  restrictive licenses.
> > > > +  To use the SIL Open Font License 1.1, put the following SPDX tag=
/value pair
> > > > +  into a comment according to the placement guidelines in the lice=
nsing rules
> > > > +  documentation:
> > > > +    SPDX-License-Identifier: OFL-1.1
> > >=20
> > > Where did this Usage-Guide from?
> >=20
> > Adapted from LICENSES/dual/CC-BY-4.0.
>=20
> Which it shouldn't be :(
>=20
> Anyway, this is independent of the issue if we actually should take
> these fonts into the kernel tree, and mandate their use (my opinion is
> no, that's not for us to use, and especially for any action that might
> cause a web browser to look elsewhere outside of our documentation.)
>=20
> Also, for documentation, I'm pretty sure that serif fonts is proven to
> be "nicer" overall by many studies.

Any pointer to them? Or do serif fonts more readable and not causing
eye strain?

Thanks.

--=20
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

--afQLVpNKUr+IwTwT
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYKAB0WIQSSYQ6Cy7oyFNCHrUH2uYlJVVFOowUCZUWV8wAKCRD2uYlJVVFO
o4D4AQCtMjcSOoBop88UH+0ZkQFoouUH5Hxtt7s/i+MS2q3JEgEA4fklHr2mrooR
xXx+OLVk4pJPR5fiaCbohGvDdD68HgM=
=e9ra
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--afQLVpNKUr+IwTwT--