Bullet-proof method of asking upstream for clarification?

[Nicolas Mailhot]

On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 07:24 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 02:21:56PM +0900, Jared Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 09:20 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > > It would be nice if some non-English speakers on this list would look at
> > > it.  Then post to the list here to tell me if any of the text rubs you
> > > the wrong way! :-)
> > 
> > Well, I wouldn't go so far as to call myself a non-English speaker, but
> > it might be good to include a link to Fedora's licensing policy, so that
> > if nothing else, this can be an educational experience for the person
> > receiving an email such as this.
> 
> Your wish is my command -- so added! ;-)
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/DraftUpstreamRequestEmail

I'm obviously a bad person to comment on, since my messages often go
through as "undiplomatic", but can you add a line about adding a
detached text license file in the same archive as the font files?

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fonts/attachments/20080725/e7027bd7/attachment.bin