On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 16:13 +0100, Antoine Musso wrote: > The fonts-inconsolata source package already has some references to > FontForge, at least there is a /fontforge-sfds/ directory with an > Inconsolata.sfd file. > > Might be worth another bug to migrate the package to contrib per DFSG if > it violates it. I mean the existing package doesn't have a problem but updating to the Google version might make a move to contrib needed, which would be sad. > > It would also be great if the Google folks could forward their changes > > upstream instead of forking it. > > Upstream Raph Levien (added to CC) commented on another bug report: > > > Yes, the version at Google Web Fonts is more recent and should > > be considered the definitive one. > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688212#20 > > Seems fine :) Hmm, so Raph has abandoned it. A shame :( > That is a similar issue to the FontForge sources above. Other fonts > package probably ships .VFB. If they are in contrib, I guess Inconsolata > should be moved there as well. Inconsolata only needs to move to contrib if we use the Google version, as far as we can tell Raph's version comes with full sources that can be rebuilt using only DFSG-free tools from Debian main. Google's doesn't. An alternative might be to keep Raph's version, patch the source to fix the issue reported and build the font from source. Unfortunately we need Raph to provide us with the build process he used first. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688212#25 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688212#30 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688212#35 -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part