[Pkg-fonts-devel] Sponsorship for ttf-oldstandard

Nicolas Spalinger nicolas_spalinger at sil.org
Sun Aug 5 16:13:09 UTC 2007

Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2007, Nicolas Spalinger wrote:
>> I'm cc-ing the Debian fonts team in case another DD is willing to offer
>> sponsorship if you're too busy.
> I am OK to sponsor.

Dear Mohammed,

Thanks for your very responsive review of the packaging and for pointing
things out that I missed. It prompted me to look over it again and catch
a few more things. Much appreciated :)

Thanks for your sponsorship offer too but, if you don't mind, I'd rather
wait some more to hear what Pantenis or Konstantinos think. The initial
packaging work was done by Pantenis and he contacted me (since I did the
ITP) for help/review.

However, please fix this first:
>  - debian/copyright
>    ----------------
> "The complete text of the OFL can be found in
> `/usr/share/doc/ttf-oldstand-1.0/OFL.txt'."
>     --> /usr/share/doc/ttf-oldstand/OFL.txt

Since the full text is already quoted, I think we don't need that
external reference and we can drop the paragraph.

BTW, in an earlier thread eugen and bubulle suggested that the OFL might
be usefully added to /usr/share/common-licenses:

> Please also specify the license of the packaging.

Good point. But it will be up to Pantelis to decide. I'll only put up a
placeholder for now. And the build scripts will need the proper headers to.

IMHO, that brings up a good item for discussion among the team wrt. to
our packaging policy and our approach to collaborative maintainership of
the packages.

For the particular context of font packaging I would highly recommend
using the same license for the packaging as the font itself.

Having various licenses in one package can be confusing, it will make it
much trickier to satisfy differing requirements. And when we have more
fonts built directly from source and the packaging hosted in the same
repository IMHO it will cause problems.

Currently only 7 out of 40 or so packages hosted in our svn have such a

Is the packaging copyrighted by the initial packager only? by
contributors? Do we assign something to the team? Mmm...
What do you think?

>  - debian/compat, debian/control
>    -----------------------------
> Please switch to debhelper 5.


The updated version is in svn.
I'll upload new packages later.


Nicolas Spalinger

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/attachments/20070805/b4fb0fb0/attachment.pgp 

More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list