Say a Theme includes header images (.jpg, .gif, .png... whatever): those files, as-is, are editable, using an appropriate image editor (Photoshop, GIMP, whatever).<div><br></div><div>I think that anything beyond that is probably beyond the scope of the WPTRT, because it gets far too subjective regarding the "preferred" human-editable version of a file. Bear in mind: we're not talking about compiled executables, but rather non-executable binary blobs. (Well, *usually* they're non-executable; we've seen some... inventive hacks submitted to the repository before.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Chip<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Doug Stewart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:zamoose@gmail.com">zamoose@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Not by my lights. Non-SVGs are (for the most part) rendered bitmaps.<br>
To meet the "source code" burden, I would think the .xcf, .psd, etc.<br>
would be necessary.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Chip Bennett <<a href="mailto:chip@chipbennett.net">chip@chipbennett.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> The binary *is* the editable source, isn't it?<br>
><br>
> Chip<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Doug Stewart <<a href="mailto:zamoose@gmail.com">zamoose@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Here's my question:<br>
>> How does a developer provide the "source" in order to comply with GPL<br>
>> licensing constraints?<br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Kirk Wight <<a href="mailto:kwight@kwight.ca">kwight@kwight.ca</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > How do we feel about adding the following to the Guidelines, as another<br>
>> > bullet under Licensing :<br>
>> ><br>
>> > "If the theme includes any binary files (such as images, fonts, or<br>
>> > icons),<br>
>> > themes are required to explicitly declare all GPL-compatible licenses<br>
>> > for<br>
>> > these files (this can be done in readme.txt)."<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On 9 February 2012 19:44, Chip Bennett <<a href="mailto:chip@chipbennett.net">chip@chipbennett.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> The main question is: who holds the *copyright* on the binaries in<br>
>> >> question, and is the *copyright holder's license* explicit?<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> if the Theme dev has created all of the binaries (images, etc.) in the<br>
>> >> Theme, then the style.css license declaration is sufficient. If, on the<br>
>> >> other hand, the Theme is bundling binaries for which the developer<br>
>> >> *isn't*<br>
>> >> the copyright holder, then the original copyright and license need to<br>
>> >> be<br>
>> >> included explicitly.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Chip<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Emil Uzelac <<a href="mailto:emil@themeid.com">emil@themeid.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> If the media in general is GPL I don't think that they need to<br>
>> >>> be separated from the i.e. license.txt. Everything can<br>
>> >>> be combined into one<br>
>> >>> license, either license.txt or link to browser-based license. If the<br>
>> >>> licence<br>
>> >>> is GPL-Compatible, small note in readme.txt should be more than<br>
>> >>> enough.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> Emil<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Kirk Wight <<a href="mailto:kwight@kwight.ca">kwight@kwight.ca</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> Speaking of: <a href="http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review#Licensing" target="_blank">http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review#Licensing</a><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> and <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/2011-October/007141.html" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/2011-October/007141.html</a><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> How do you all handle licensing for binaries, such as images, fonts,<br>
>> >>>> etc? I've been quite a hard-ass with it lately in my reviews because<br>
>> >>>> of the<br>
>> >>>> above two references, but I'm noticing that it's difficult to even<br>
>> >>>> point<br>
>> >>>> people to an approved theme in the repo where it's done well. And if<br>
>> >>>> it's<br>
>> >>>> only a few images/graphics, are people being more lenient?<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> One could argue that if the explicit license isn't there for<br>
>> >>>> binaries,<br>
>> >>>> then it falls under the general statement in style.css - but that<br>
>> >>>> makes me<br>
>> >>>> feel funny.<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>>> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>> >>>> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>> >>>> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>> >>> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>> >>> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>> >> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>> >> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
>> >><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>> > <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> -Doug<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
-Doug<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>