Hi Julian,this is highly appreciated, thanks for all the effort you put into
this!I'd recommend to avoid the "awesome" part of the name altogether. Font
Awesome upstream apparently changed his mind and had become rather hostile
towards open development, so we shouldn't give them more reason to feel under
attack. How about "font-dfsgsome" or "font-handsome" or whatever wordplay you
like? - Fabian Von meinem/meiner Galaxy gesendet
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------Von: Julian Gilbey <j...@debian.org>
Datum: 29.01.23 13:21 (GMT+01:00) An: Jonas Smedegaard <jo...@jones.dk> Cc:
902...@bugs.debian.org, Bastian Germann <b...@debian.org> Betreff: Bug#902981:
Font Awesome v5 in Debian On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 12:21:29PM +0100, Jonas
Smedegaard wrote:> Quoting Julian Gilbey (2023-01-29 12:03:30)> > If you would
like me to go ahead and work on this, please say.> > Sure I would like you to
go ahead - why would I not want that?> > Sounds like a fun project, and Free,
and beneficial to Debian.Great!> One thing you might consider is to name the
resulting package something> (similar but) different than fontawesome, to not
upset upstream> developers by hijacking their name for something arguably
different.A good point. I was thinking of creating a GitHub project
calledFontAwesome-DFSG, with a README explaining what is it, how it wascreated
and how it is not endorsed by the FontAwesome "owners". ButI'm not sure what
to call the Debian package - it is essentially justa repackaging of the
FontAwesome fonts. Perhaps we could call thesource package
fonts-font-awesome-dfsg, and the binary packagesfonts-font-awesome-4.7,
fonts-font-awesome-dfsg-5,fonts-font-awesome-dfsg-6 and fonts-font-awesome-dfsg
(for the currentversion of the upstream font)?I'm open to ideas!Best wishes,
Julian
