[theme-reviewers] SIL Open Font License

[Emil Uzelac]

Siobhan, you did something pretty awesome today and thank you for that. See
we have this as compatible and majority of Google Fonts are released under
SIL, which means that any theme we approved will no longer be able to use
SIL. Again, I am now completely off and not sure how is this possible, was
it changed and why.

We definitely need some clarifications.

Let's leave the guideline as-is till we get to the bottom of this :)

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Tammie Lister <karmatosed at gmail.com> wrote:

>  Yes, I'm a bit confused to. It really does appear to not be compatible
> which worries me if it isn't. We can fix, but we need to be sure. This is
> why I suggested from IRC Siobhan post here. Licenses are hard :)
>
> Thanks
> Tammie
>
>
> On 08/10/2014 20:47, Siobhan Bamber wrote:
>
> Really? I'm confused about why this site say otherwise in that case. :/
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
>
>  It's listed next to the "Free license, incompatible with the GNU GPL and
> FDL" colour code. Can you let me know where I can find more information on
> this?
>
>  Siobhan
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>
>>  SIL is 100% GPL-Compatible ;)
>>
>>  On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Siobhan Bamber <siobhanbamber at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  Hey there.
>>>
>>>  I'm currently reviewing a child theme that includes fonts licensed
>>> under the SIL Open Font License 1.1. Looking over the GNU website, I can
>>> see that this license isn't 100% GPL-compatible:
>>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
>>>
>>>  The parent theme has the same fonts as the child and is in the WP.org
>>> repository already.
>>>
>>>  The GNU site does state the following, which, along with the parent
>>> theme already being accepted, made me second guess whether this license was
>>> allowed: "Neither we nor SIL recommend the use of this license for anything
>>> other than fonts."
>>>
>>>  Is this a case where something slipped through or do we allow themes
>>> that have this license for fonts only?
>>>
>>>  Thanks in advance for helping to clear this up!
>>>
>>>  Siobhan
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing listtheme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.orghttp://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Tammie Lister
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20141008/ace03854/attachment-0001.html>