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
