[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#851339: Bug#851339: Bug#851339: Bug#851339: Bug#851339: fonts-firacode: package in Debian with non-Debian build dependencies

Scott Kitterman sklist at kitterman.com
Wed Jan 18 01:12:16 UTC 2017

On January 17, 2017 3:49:46 PM EST, Fabian Greffrath <fabian at debian.org> wrote:
>Hash: SHA256
>Am Mittwoch, den 18.01.2017, 03:24 +1100 schrieb Ben Finney:
>> Debian recipients should have equal access to make modifications to
>> the work, build the work from modified source, and install the
>> result.
>All these modifications could be made to the OTF files *just as well*,
>there is no advantage in using the same font format as upstream does
>for their development. But I figure we are running in circles now. ;)
>> The fact of the matter is the Glyphs data files are the preferred
>> form
>> of the work to make modifications.
>Please note that the "preferred form for modification" is a term
>exclusive to the GPL, it does not necessarily apply to fonts licensed
>under any other license. Also, I am not sure if this is really exactly
>what is meant by the "missing sources" paragraph of the REJECTS FAQs.

DFSG #2 requires that "The program must include source code".  Preferred form of modification is the definition of source that the FTP team uses.  For Debian DFSG purposes it's not exclusively GPL relevant.

Scott K

>> It would reveal that Debian recipients do not have equal access to
>> the source, for modifying building, and installing the work.
>And thus you would file a bug requesting the removal of this package
>from Debian main? Are you even aware of the vast consequences that this
>overly strict interpretation of the "missing sources" paragraph may
> - Fabian

More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list