source code pro font vs noto font

[Maximiliano Curia]

On Monday, 18 July 2016 19:47:56 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> I'm looking to change Plasma's default Mono font away from the
> unmaintained Oxygen Mono.  The obvious choice is Noto Mono since our
> default serif font is Noto.  Noto Mono is for some reason not in the
> Mono releases but is availble in Git since the start of the year and
> many distros get packaging from Git.

Hack is a good alternative.

> Kate devs have pointed out that it doesn't have bold or italic
> variants and this makes some formatting in Kate appear missing.
> There's been a suggestion of Adobe's Source Code Pro

Adobe Source Code Pro, won't be in Debian till the tools to build it are [1], 
and that's a bit stalled at the moment.

If possible, please don't choose this one. If you do, please make it so it's 
easy for us to fallback to the Debian default fonts (DejaVu Sans Mono).

> Do distros have an opinion on a preferred font to use which they could
> make available?

From the Debian perspective, in order of preference (decreasing):
DejaVu Sans Mono
Noto Mono
Hack

And vote against Adobe's Source Code Pro.

Happy hacking,

[1]: https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko.git
-- 
"The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be
regarded as a criminal offense."
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra
Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/distributions/attachments/20160720/14156c25/attachment.sig>