[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#595963: RFP: yanone-kaffeesatz -- TTF and OTF font in four weights
abe at debian.org
Wed Sep 8 10:29:44 UTC 2010
Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Axel Beckert (abe at debian.org):
> > Package: wnpp
> > Severity: wishlist
> > * Package name : yanone-kaffeesatz
> Could that be turned out into ttf-yanone-kaffeesatz?
I deliberately did not choose ttf-yanone-kaffeesatz since the name
above should be the source package name and not the binary name. (The
same counts for the description. I'd not put my description in the
binary packages, but I'm not very good at describing non-technical
And if the source package will contain both, TTF and OTF, I would
regard ttf-yanone-kaffeesatz as a very bad choice.
The resulting binary packages of course should be named
ttf-yanone-kaffeesatz and otf-yanone-kaffeesatz.
> Of course, the package is meant to provide OTF and TTF fonts, but
> that would at least follow the naming logic of other font packages?
If that is the logic, it is no logic.
But I fear it's really that mad:
And the source neither has TTF nor OTF but only SFDs. I regard such
cases of source package names as quite misleading.
Anyway, back to this RFP: I saw font packages in the archive which had
only the TTF files in the source package while I also saw packages
like ttf-freefont, which do have SFD files as "source" for the TTF and
Then again, there are fonts under CC licenses (which seems fine for
TTF files as they are "art" similar to images or texts) as well as
GPL'ed fonts (where I'd expect to be able to get the SFD "source").
Does Debian make any difference between those two types of "free"
Because for Kaffeesatz you just get the TTF and OTF, not the source --
if any exists at all. (I have no idea how many ways are there to
create TTFs or if you even can create it directly in an editor.)
It could also be a possibility to make two source packages out of it,
ttf-yanone-kaffeesatz and otf-yanone-kaffeesatz since upstream
distributes the font as two ZIP files, one for the TTFs and one for
the OTFs -- which means that repackaging is necessary anyway, so a
single source package would make no real difference, and I'd expect
that our ftp-masters would prefer the single source package.
P.S.: Please Cc me, I'm not on the list.
,''`. | Axel Beckert <abe at debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
`- | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel