Quoting Fabian Greffrath (2017-01-21 12:39:17) >> FYI, you are mistaken that C code is always "source". C is sometimes >> generated from other forms, via transpilers or lexer generators etc. >> It can also be obfuscated C code from the real C source (cf #383465). >> [...] >> So like C, OTF can be source or not source, depending on the upstream >> project. > > I find this by far the most convincing argument, although I still find > it difficult to accept that it should make a difference for Debian as > a mere downstream distributor. We provide many packages with fonts in > OTF format and while this is acepted as a proper source for some, it > is not for others because of upstream design decisions? I agree it feels weird that some fonts are fine to distribute as-is in Debian whereas other fonts using same format cannot - simply because we are aware that a different format is used for upstream development. But I believe this is not a unique oddity. A more common equivalent is makefiles, some of which are hand-written and others are auto-generated. "is used as source upstream" and "can be used as source downstream" are different things, and I believe Debian Policy talks about the former. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature