Quoting Nicolas Spalinger (2017-03-31 13:16:39) > On 03/31/2017 12:16 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Quoting Nicolas Spalinger (2017-03-31 11:16:42) > >> I agree that fonts should be like any other software and build from source completely and that's the end-goal I (and others) have been working towards. > >> It's proving MUCH harder than expected. > >> The difficulty of maintaining fontforge has probably shown Debian maintainers how difficult this whole business of font toolchain actually is... > >> The work on the licensing layer (establishing the Open Font License) was the first step, we've been tackling the reproducible buildpath for a while now. > >> > >> Thankfully others in the type design communities are tackling that > >> conundrum too. IMHO Google's Noto toolchain is one good example. > >> (scoop: they don't use FontForge). We are going for something more > >> generic that other projects and maintainers can use. > > > > For the record: I am directly involved in packaging fonts-noto. And I > > am seriously considering moving that package to contrib, after becoming > > more aware of the upstream development process (I thought Google bought > > finalized fonts and rebranded them without expecting further development > > - but it is now clear that they do continuous further refinement - > > seemingly in a way not possible to replicate using purely Free tool). > > Hi Jonas, > > Thank you for your work on this and other packages ! > > Are you looking at https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-source or something else? > My understanding, from the presentation of the maintainers at AtypI Warsaw, and from watching the project for a while, > that they do have a working python-based toolchain that they are constantly refining via a continuous integration system. Thanks for the pointers. I have not yet looked closely - and when I do I might very likely learn that upstream indeed uses purely Free tools in their workflow - in which case the issue with fonts-noto is "only" the lack of _packaging_ those tools. Which is a real issue. >> As Paul already pointed out, your current fonts needing non-free >> build tools can be part of the "contrib" area loosy related to >> Debian, and when Free tools and/or your use of them evolve, we can >> ideally include the fonts with Debian proper. > > And yet, when Christian Perrier (bubulle) launched the team back in > around 2006, it was perfectly OK to ship end-user fonts that had no > Debian-specific buildpath. To extend language support and installer > i18n support among other things. We still do. What we do not accept is fonts _with_ a buildpath requiring tools not in Debian. > I see very few font packages in contrib right now. I see lots of fonts not packaged for Debian at all. - 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