<html> <head> <style> .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { font-size: 10pt; font-family:Verdana } </style> </head> <body class='hmmessage'> > Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:21:15 -0700 > Subject: Fonts in the Graphics Meta > From: afterthebeep@gmail.com > To: ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com > > Hey everyone, > > I was up late working on a poster and for the life of me couldn't find > the perfect font for the job. That's when I did an 'apt-cache search > font' and realized that there's a massive cornucopia of font packages > in the repositories awaiting my install. That's when I thought to > myself: "Self, why aren't these font packages part of the Ubuntu > Studio graphics meta package?" > > I think it would be organizationally best (if the list concurs that > fonts in the graphics package would be good) to have a font meta > package that is in turn a dependency of the graphics meta (simply > because the sheer number of font packages would clutter the graphics > package if added directly). The other question on my mind is "would > it be okay to include non-free fonts in this meta?" and for that I > turn the floor over to those more experienced... > > -Eric Hedekar > I agree that this is a good idea.  I also agree with Cory K. in that only the free fonts would be bundled.  And of course, those are the ones that should be used for paying gigs anyhow. :-) ~ imag1narynumber <hr />Windows Live™ SkyDrive™: Store, access, and share your photos. <a href='http://windowslive.com/Online/SkyDrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_CS_SD_photos_072009' target='_new'>See how.</a></body> </html>