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

[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: Bug#665334: non-DFSG postscript embedded in fontforge #665334

Hi Read--

Thanks for the thoughtful and helpful followup!  Comments below:

On 09/04/2012 11:33 AM, Read Roberts wrote:
> Given enough time, Adobe could publish the MM othersubr code under an OpenSource license. However,  although the Adobe Type Dept could  request this pretty quickly, it would take many months to actually happen  - the this will sit at the bottom of the legal groups's priority list for a long time.

Even if it takes a long time, this would be great.  If you're part of
the Adobe Type Dept, could you make the request internally and let us
know what its status is?

Even if it takes a long time, it would be nice to have that licensing
change done (and maybe it would encourage adobe to publish its examples
with more liberal licenses going forward as well).

> I am not familiar with the context for this thread.

You can read the background here: http://bugs.debian.org/665334 -- feel
free to ask questions if parts of the discussion aren't clear.

> However, it seems to me that the font forge code could simply be eliminated. This MM subrs in question is needed only for making new MM Type1 fonts, which is a bad idea. The MM format is not supported in OpenType, and over time, support for authoring with plain Type 1 fonts is getting steadily sketchier. Of course, MM Type1 fonts in existing documents will need to be supported indefintely – PDF's and fonts are forever.

we're leaning roughly in this direction, as described in
http://bugs.debian.org/665334 .  But as you say, these things are
"forever", and we'd like to enable people to build old fonts cleanly on
new systems if they find they need them for whatever reason.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: