I do think it makes more sense to maintain this as Ubuntu diffs against the existing packages instead of duplicating those packages. We have a lot of process in place that helps us track differences between Ubuntu and Debian packages of the same name, which we wouldn't be leveraging if creating a new package.
> (Also, Debian has a newer version available than what we ship, > the ttf-indic-fonts need to get merged or synced. I took the fonts > from the latest Debian package and planned to sync the > ttf-indic-fonts packages after this package gets uploaded, to get > rid of the ubuntu diff. So, the font versions would be the same > as in Debian in Lucid.) I'm happy to have ttf-indic-fonts merged from Debian for this, please consider the FFe for that granted. [ttf-kacst-one] > Actually, if it has been uploaded to Debian already and is just > stuck in the queue, we could maybe take it directly from there...? It's non-trivial to get access to new packages *in* the queue, due to legal concerns, but you could contact the maintainers (listed at http ://ftp-master.debian.org/new/ttf-kacst-one_3.0-1.html) and request a copy. (It's probably best to upload this to lucid as 3.0-0ubuntu1 or 3.0-1~build1, in case the uploaders themselves no longer have the exactly identical source package.) > If it's only the Takao Gothic font being left in here, it would make > sense to just create a package for that standalone font and > update it later when the rest of the Takao fonts get packaged. I agree. As long as this is implemented on top of the existing source packages, then FFe granted - please go ahead. -- FFE/UIFE: replace some font packages with ubuntu-desktop-fonts on the LiveCD https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/535582 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
