Re: Bug#156852: ITP: ttf-dustismo -- general purpose gpl'ed truetype sans serif font
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> That doesn't mean we have to mindlessly stick to it when packaging a 100k
> font though. We also have the example of freefont, which used uner 3 mb for
> 79 smaller type 1 fonts.
No, but neither does it mean we need to follow the freefont example. That
case is a licensing nightmare and is in non-free. Even though the proposed
package would be entirely free, you still may end up with a mishmash of
licenses. So what is to be done about that? One package per license? One
per foundry? I'm not sure what kind of grouping makes sense.
> > > Note the existing freefont and sharefont packages, which were compiled
> > > by a Debian developer. Why should truetype fonts be packaged any
> > > differently?
> > >
> >
> > I don't think they should. My original intent was to make a
> > free-ttffont package, and I'd rather do that.
>
> That makes sense to me.
I would rather see some compromise between one font per package and all
fonts in one package. Some breakdown of fonts into separate packages is
convenient for users who want to pick and choose. And in particular, I
think it's nice if a game can say "Depends: ttf-blah" instead of having its
own private copy of a given font. If, on the other hand, the font is one of
80 in a 3M package, it is less attractive to do so, which is going to
encourage maintainers to leave the font as an embedded font in the package
(which is probably how upstream distributes it).
Ben
--
nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca
Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org
[ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]
[ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
Reply to: