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

Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Some queries

Thanks Daniel and Christian for the quick replies :)

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
<dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
> Hi Vasudev--
> On 04/25/2011 01:19 PM, Vasudev Kamath wrote:
>> I'm packaging http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=623944
> Thanks!
>> 1.This font package contains ttf, otf, woff and svg. I was just
>> curious to know is there a policy for svg and  woff fonts in Debian.
> How are all these formats generated?
Upstream ships sfd ttf otf woff and svg files
> For simplicity, I would start by making a binary package (a .deb) with
> just one preferred font format (i'd probably lean toward ttf or otf --
> other more experienced team members might have other preferences).  If
> you get a request for the other formats, you can consider packaging them
> later, either as separate packages, or adding them to the primary .deb.
Ok I'll package the ttf font for now. If some one requests for other
format I'll package them in future releases

>> 2. Also is it mandatory to build the fonts from sfd if its provided by
>> the upstream?
> If upstream uses the .sfd as their preferred form for modification, then
> yes, the packaging should build any other distributed formats from the .sfd.
> This is important for several reasons:
>  * bugs introduced in new versions of fontforge (or other sfd-processing
> packages) will get noticed and we can report them to fontforge upstream.
>  * bugs in the .sfd itself will get noticed and we can report them to
> the upstream foundry.
>  * most importantly: debian users can be sure that they can modify the
> tools they use as they see fit.
Ok I'll try building it from sfd
> hth,
>        --dkg

Thanks and Regards

Vasudev Kamath

Reply to: