[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#798261: ITP: fonts-roboto-fontface -- largely geometric, friendly and open curves font

Jonas Smedegaard dr at jones.dk
Wed Sep 9 08:09:41 UTC 2015

Quoting Thomas Goirand (2015-09-09 09:20:51)
> On 09/08/2015 10:11 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quoting Thomas Goirand (2015-09-08 09:28:15)
>>> On 09/07/2015 08:42 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>>>> If you wish to drop the generation of fonts-roboto from the 
>>>>> fonts-android package, then good.
>>>> I think the better approach is to keep the fonts-roboto package, have 
>>>> your package exclude fonts, depend on the fonts-roboto package, and 
>>>> symlink font files from there as needed.
>>> I don't think so. The fonts-roboto package currently only provides 
>>> .tff files, which are useless for the web. The sources aren't the 
>>> same.
>> What are the sources, then?
> git://github.com/choffmeister/roboto-fontface-bower.git

I do understand that above is the URL you intend to fetch the project 
from.  What I meant by my question is what is the source of the material 
you are fetching?  What is the source of WOFF and SVG files?

Or do you mean to tell me that WOFF and SVG files are _forks_ of the TTF 
files, developed independently onwards?  I find that highly unlikely.

>>>>> Do you think I should join the pkg-fonts group to maintain these 
>>>>> fonts under the group?
>>>> We can always use more helping hands in the fonts team :-)
>>>> But if your focus is on OpenStack then perhaps just coordinate with 
>>>> the font team on tuning the fonts-roboto package to provide what is 
>>>> needed for reuse with OpenStack - i.e. those web representations of 
>>>> the font (CSS/Sass/Less sounds like OpenStack-specific glue so 
>>>> probably makes best sense to package separately).
>>> They aren't OpenStack specific, it's just modern Javascript stuff, 
>>> which can be reused by any project.
>> Great - then suggest maintainers of the existing package to adopt 
>> those tiny files too.
> Well, we just talked about dropping the generation of fonts-roboto 
> from the old source package... Or am I missing something?

Yes, that is a suggestion you brought up, but which it seems neither 
Vasudev nor me agree with.

Looking at recent posts from Paul Wise on the fonts team list, it seems 
he also do not agree with packaging fonts known to have their actual 
source - even if our tools to rebuild from that canonical source is 
currently lacking in Debian.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/attachments/20150909/f6251ad5/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list