On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Xyne
And the license says: "This font may not be distributed or sold -not online nor on any media- without my permission"
So maybe this package could be added to the community repo, if the font designer allows it.
Heiko
Are there any packages in the official repos that are distributed under the same conditions? I expect that the Arch devs would be reluctant to maintain a portfolio of agreements with various developers granting Arch the right to distribute their work. Perhaps that could be left to the package maintainer but I think they would still be on the line as the official distributors of the packages. I don't really know who bears ultimate responsibility though.
We have a distribution agreement with adobe to distribute flash and tried to get one with opera (but failed there). But no, we should not add silly fonts or insignificant applications to our repos with these kind of agreements IMHO.
I think it would actually make more sense to provide a trusted version of the AUR with a subset of packages from the AUR that the user could install with the same confidence as the official packages. This would be ideal for avoiding many legal pitfalls but opponents of the idea will simply say that the AUR already does this and that all you need to do is check the PKGBUILD and install scripts yourself.
Xyne
agreed, AUR seems fine to me for this package. Ronald