On Friday, June 12, 2026 8:11:46 AM Mountain Standard Time Fabian Greffrath wrote: >> Does anyone have any objections if we standardize that as a >> policyrecommendation and update the lintian tests to match? > > Not at all, please go ahead!
I apologize for the delay in preparing the documentation. A number of fires erupted in the past weeks that needed my attention. Below is a link to a wiki edit that I think captures the consensus of how WOFF/WOFF2 fonts should be handled in Debian. https://wiki.debian.org/Fonts/PackagingPolicy?action=diff&rev2=47&rev1=45 The highlights of this policy are: 1. Fonts (including WOFF/WOFF2) should be shipped in font packages. 2. WOFF/WOFF2 fonts should be shipped in /usr/share/fonts-fontname/WOFF and /usr/share/fonts-fontname/WOFF2. 3. Not all fonts packages need to ship WOFF/WOFF2 fonts, but if a package in Debian needs them, a bug report can be opened requesting they be shipped. Either the woff2 or the sfnt2woff-zopfli utilities can be used to create the WOFF/WOFF2 fonts from TTF at package time, and the font package maintainer can choose whether to ship them in the main font binary package or in a separate binary package. Please let me know if there are any objections to these policies or if you feel that any of the wording in the wiki needs to be adjusted to better represent what is desired. Jonas, I would be particularly interested in your feedback as I want to make sure that you are OK with what is decided. -- Soren Stoutner [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
