Re: Follow-up question to alternate music fonts

[David Kastrup]

tisimst <address@hidden> writes:

> All,
>
> Is there anyone who is VERY against distributing music fonts in binary form
> (i.e., as otf, svg, etc.files)? I just don't see how we can make other music
> fonts available by forcing them to have a metafont source file. I guess that
> could be nice, but it seems like so much work to do that. I have about 4 or
> 5 alternate music fonts that people could use and I certainly don't want to
> convert them to metafont. They are currently designed and built with
> fontforge.
>
> What do you think?

Spirit of the GPL is delivering source code, defined as "preferred form
of modification, including all scripts etc".  Now fonts are reasonably
separate anyway, but that's what we should stick with.  METAFONT is just
one possibility here.

If the fonts are derived from some upstream source, automating the
derivation as much as possible makes sense in order to facilitate
integrating future improvements from upstream.

-- 
David Kastrup