[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Help/sponsorship needed in upstreaming multiple elpa/melpa packages to debian



Hi Lev,

Lev Lamberov <dogsleg@debian.org> writes:

> Ср 20 мая 2020 @ 19:39 Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com>:
>>> all-the-icons.el:
>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=893983
>>> https://salsa.debian.org/Valdaer/all-the-icons.el
>>> https://mentors.debian.net/package/all-the-icons-el
>>>
>>
>> I do not believe this one meets our high standards, which is why I gave
>> up on the ITP.  Namely, I investigated the standards of the Font Team,
>> saw how they were generating fonts, saw this was not possible with
>> all-the-icons.el.  I believe I also filed some bugs and/or attempted to
>> contact our Font Team, but sadly never received a reply.  At any rate,
>> while I think font icons are a cool hack, others have expressed strong
>> opinions about how font icons are an abomination that should DIAF.
>>
>> Supposing we did go ahead with uploading this, my concerns are:  1)
>> trademarked images that are removed from the font-foo packages for DFSG
>> reasons.  2) Conflicts with the system-wide font-foo packages and
>> associated bug potential.
>>
>> I just noticed I never provided my rationale to #893983, so I'm doing
>> that now.
>
> Probably one could use fonts from the Debian archive. That is,
> symlinking them, or changing relevant ELisp code, no? At least font
> Awesome is already packaged as fonts-font-awesome. Guess in case some of
> the fonts are not packaged yet, one should package them separately
> first.
>

Yes, I think you're right, so long as all-the-icons doesn't require
custom propertised fonts.  Maybe my analysis was wrong, but I thought
that it required this...

Cheers,
Nicholas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: