I do not see a maintainability benefit here, we aren't packaging the
bootstrap CSS framework, are we? This font in the case of this one
package is used in the HTML documentation for the package. The majority
use case for this font is to be paired with bootstrap, to be rendered by
a web browser, you are going to encounter it dozens of times a week on
various websites already. Since this font is likely to be used by web
applications as a TTF/OTF/WOFF web-font how are we going to handle the
selinux context to allow the httpd access to the font file, or any other
application server that runs an application packaged in the collection?
Stefan Nuxoll <stefan@nuxoll.eu.org<mailto:stefan@nuxoll.eu.org>>
----------------------------------------
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
From: ppisar(a)redhat.com
Subject: Re: Packaged fonts? (and regular audits?)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 07:07:15 +0000
On 2015-07-14, Stefan Nuxoll <stefan(a)nuxoll.eu.org> wrote:
> This is going to be pretty common for anything that uses the bootstrap
> CSS framework, since glyphicons is bundled as part of it. I do not see
> much benefit from packaging this separately, especially as the license
> for the glyphicons halflings font included with bootstrap is MIT, but
> CC-BY from the upstream (
glyphicons.org).
>
This is not matter of license. This matter of mainainability and
security. Did you know that T42 fonts can contain code which is interpreted
by font rendering engine?
-- Petr
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct