Hi Gunnar, > Basically I'm asking if this move towards Noto is desirable and, if > so, I plea for relevant input for the completion of the transition.
as has already been stated elsewhere, fontconfig upstream's move to Noto as the default font has most probably not been done for aesthetical reasons. That is, it is not the "most beautiful font" that people "like better" then DejaVu, but the single usable fallback font with the widest glyph coverage. However, I think that the acceptance - or rather lack thereof - of the Noto fonts in Debian has indeed to do with the way they are currently packaged. There is no pendant to the fonts-dejavu-core package which only installs the generic serif and sans-serif flavors. Instead, even the fonts-noto-core package installs a full pack of 268 (!) font files. This is discussed in detail in #983291 [1]. So, if asked for my personal opinion, I could live with DejaVu Mono as the default monospace font (for aesthetical reasons) and Noto Sans and Serif as the default sans-serif and serif fonts (for pragmatic reasons), respectively, but only if the latter are packaged separately. Cheers, - Fabian [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=983291
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
