On 24.11.21 10:37, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Thomas Lamprecht (2021-11-24 10:03:09) >> On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 18:45:25 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Quoting Thomas Lamprecht (2021-11-21 17:29:07) >>>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 10:35:41 +0000 Phil Armstrong <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 21:35:58 -0500 Jeremy Bicha wrote: >>>>> >Google hasn't really published their sources for Roboto Mono yet so I >>>>> think it's more appropriate for that to go into contrib instead for >>>>> now. >>>>> >>>>> The sources to Roboto Mono appear to have been published here in 2018: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/googlefonts/RobotoMono >>>>> >>>>> but there’s no licence in the repo at the moment. I’ve raised an issue, >>>>> so hopefully Google will add one & we can get this font packaged in >>>>> Debian! >>>> >>>> There's also another repo with a license file which marks it as Apache-2.0: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/google/fonts/tree/main/apache/robotomono >>> >>> As previously mentioned in this bugreport, >>> https://github.com/google/fonts/ contains only binary products, not >>> sources. License for non-source code is relevant only if released in >>> non-free. >>> >> >> Argh, sorry - missed that; but it seems that the other repo also linked here >> in >> this bug report got some updates since its initial mentioning (when it >> wasn't complete >> yet), and contains now all sources (FWICT, not really a font developer): >> >> https://github.com/googlefonts/RobotoMono/tree/main/sources >> >> and also the built fonts, e.g.: >> https://github.com/googlefonts/RobotoMono/tree/main/fonts/ttf >> >> would that be enough? > > Haven't tested but might be enough source to produce binaries, yes. > > But for Debian to _distribute_ produced binaries, license is required > which seems still missing for the source project.
Make sense, and seems that I've again shot from hips a bit too fast, there's a issue open[0] on that repo regarding the missing license, mentioning explicitly Debian, so I'll watch that one and won't bother this bug report until there's any relevant actual change. [0]: https://github.com/googlefonts/RobotoMono/issues/26 Thanks for your time. cheers, Thomas
