[Bug 2483] Review request: msttcore-fonts - TrueType core fonts for the web

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2483

--- Comment #30 from Karel Volný <kvolny at redhat.com> 2013-05-27 13:25:34 CEST ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> But this rule refers to code, not font files which i believe are bitmaps more
> or less.  font files would be termed "content", not code, and i think things
> are a bit different for that.

don't beat me for inaccuracies, I'm not font expert, but I believe TTF fonts
actually are treated as code because of some hinting stuff they include as code

this may be a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueType#Hinting_language

some more evil brainstorm:

1) I (am not the only one to) believe we can distribute the fonts if we keep
the original archives intact ... packing them together into a cpio archive with
some metadata doesn't count as a modification, as it could be understood as a
virtual filesystem they lay on, and there's no restriction whether you can put
the files on fat, ext2 or cpio image ...

2) the problem is that before use (or, right after unpacking) you have to show
EULA

hmmm ... what if the rpm included the unmodified files and the script to
install from them which would have to be run manually outside of rpm, plus the
placeholders for all the files installed by the script?

then you could use the package offline and won't break non-interactivity

btw, I like Gentoo's approach - you (as the admin) just put a clause that you
accept the particular license into the configfile, and you're set ...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.