On 2009-01-28 at 1:05:01 -0500, Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Of course, if the user really wants to, she can investigate the
binary
RPM, and find pointers to the actual license, and go and find the
license. But we would not be redistributing the license with "each
copy".
Please enlighten me.
IMHO, in such a scenario, it is acceptable to put a copy of the license
in each binary RPM. This will not cause conflicts, because it is the
same file in the same location. If this obsoletes the need for a -common
package, then do not create one.
However, the license may be embedded inside the font itself. Might be
worth poking it with FontForge to see. If it is, then this is not necessary.
~spot