https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466
--- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> ---
(In reply to David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] from comment #7)
Do you have any suggestion on how to proceed from here? Should I take
this
to FESco and ask for official exception/permission to ship both Type1/AFM
and OTF formats?
That's a poor situation to be in, but yes the minimum would be to ship the
OpenType¹ versions as required by Fedora packaging guidelines, and maybe hide
somewhere the Type1/AFM versions for GS private use (after asking Fesco). The
first priority would be to avoid Ghostscript blocking progress in other apps
that want to use those fonts. If that can help you in any way, you have my
blessing, for the little it is worth.
As an aside I understand the reluctance of Ghostscript upstream to switch from
"proven" Type1 fonts but let's be honest, Ghostscript is fed all kinds of
stuff
by third-party apps, the Type1 support of those apps is going away, they *will*
preferentially use OpenType files, so long term there will be all sorts of
subtle discrepancies between a Ghostscript that understands URW as "Type1", and
the rest of the world that thinks "Opentype". But that's typically a
"choose
your poison" situation for the Ghostscript maintainer, it need not impact the
rest of the distro the way it does now.
¹ Probably OTF not TTF given the Type1 history of those fonts
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.