Am Freitag, den 02.10.2015, 07:27 -0600 schrieb Dave Crossland:
> The official name is the rfn name; that's why the maintainer reserved
> the name. The distros need to rename or get permission. Same as
> Firefox.
So, I am currently rebuilding the Cantarell fonts from the provided
.sfd sources for
A format conversion is listed explicitly in the ofl as modification
triggering rfn permission / renaming, and converting source to binary is a
kind of format change
On Oct 2, 2015 6:02 AM, "Norbert Preining" wrote:
> > What is the relationship between the googlefonts repos and
On Fri, 02 Oct 2015, Dave Crossland wrote:
> A format conversion is listed explicitly in the ofl as modification
> triggering rfn permission / renaming, and converting source to binary is a
> kind of format change
Then what about shipping the ttf/otf as distributed?
Why do we Debian people
On Oct 2, 2015 7:32 AM, "Norbert Preining" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Oct 2015, Dave Crossland wrote:
> > A format conversion is listed explicitly in the ofl as modification
> > triggering rfn permission / renaming, and converting source to binary
is a
> > kind of format change
>
>
On Fri, 2015-10-02 at 07:07 -0600, Dave Crossland wrote:
> A format conversion is listed explicitly in the ofl as modification
> triggering rfn permission / renaming, and converting source to binary
> is a kind of format change
In addition, various historical things have meant that rebuilding
> What is the relationship between the googlefonts repos and the google
> fonts repo? It seems a bit weird to have two places for the same stuff.
Looking at the repos, the google fonts repo contains the built, ie
ready made files, while the googlefonts repo the sources.
Not that this is an
6 matches
Mail list logo