Comment 23 for bug 521163

(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > I still don't think making it unnecessarily hard for people who install fonts
> > makes any sense.
>
> but what you said is not consistent with Latin font settings in fontconfig: I
> don't see Tahoma, Calibri, Segeo etc in the latin configuration files; Arial is
> also set to a lower priority than Dejavu/Bitstream. Why should CJK use a
> reversed support order? because CJK people like piracy? (joking of course)

If they are not mentioned, they are not. I'm just talking about the case that they are.

> > If there was *any* advantage, sure, but so far I fail to see one.
>
> I thought I said it clear:
>
> 1. attract more users and feedback for CJK OSS font development. Since all OSS
> software can benefit from release-often-release-early model to evolve, why OSS
> fonts can not benefit from this model?
>
> 2. discourage unlicensed use of fonts, because it is simply wrong. if nobody
> respect font copyright, nobody will spend time to develop them and make them
> better.

I don't have any strong opinion here as long as the approach taken minimizing incoming bug reports in the future :).