Re: Bug#1135180: Bug#902981: DFSG status of fonts-font-awesome

On 5/19/26 11:11 PM, Soren Stoutner wrote:
> If anyone has concerns about whether whether SVG is the preferred form
> of modification for FontAwesome, they can fork the project, give it a new
> name, state that all future modifications will be done directly to the SVG
> files (even if there are never actually any changes made), and all the
> requirements to be DFSG-free are met.

I feel like if this is the answer and SVG are perfectly fine to be 
treated as the preferred form of modification - then I don't understand 
why we are not just shipping them. If we (and users) can feasibly modify 
the files to patch the font, I feel like the holier than thou stance of 
"yes, we just happen to know that there's a proprietary toolchain to 
generate these, but only because upstream told us" is not very helpful.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern