[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[LONG] The fonts SIG irregular status report



Hi all,

Since Fedora 11 Alpha is quickly approaching, here is a much-delayed
edition of the fonts SIG irregular status report.

I should probably have done one for Fedora 10 release, but (silly me)
expected then that the new font packaging guidelines would be adopted
quickly. After all, they only reworded existing rules and added material
already presented and discussed on the fonts and devel lists.

Of course various instances decided to celebrate F10 by taking a break,
then there was some bike-shedding, then we had the Christmas vacations,
then FUDCON and more bike-shedding. Live and learn. At least after being
hammered to death the result is clear and clean.

Anyway, to the report.


◾◾◾ New fonts packaging guidelines ◾◾◾

After much anguish and unexpected developments FPC and FESCO approved
the complete set of fonts packaging changes that we had submitted.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-announce/2009-January/msg00007.html

The end result is:
  — a completed and clarified policy page
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy

  — two new packaging templates
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts

  — and a helper package with rpm macros, documentation, plus fontconfig
and spec templates
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package


◾◾◾ Distribution-wide font auditing and repackaging ◾◾◾

Some innocent repoqueries revealed a distressing number of source
packages (>130) that made us ship fonts while completely ignoring our
previous fonts packaging guidelines and existing licensing rules. So
applying new font guidelines twists quickly turned into
distribution-wide operation.

  — Its advancement is now tracked in:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=477044

  — A (long) FAQ was published to help packagers with no fonts
experience:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)

  — To make sure documentation, QA and other groups are aware and help
implement the changes they've been proposed as a Fedora 11 feature: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Repackaging_of_Fedora_fonts


◾◾◾ Wishlist status ◾◾◾

Our wishlist stood at 56 entries for last report. It has now reached the
76 entries watermark. The current fonts packagers are clearly unable to
cope with Fedora demands, fresh blood is needed before it moves into
3-digits land.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Font_wishlist

At the same time the respected lwn.net is running a front page article
listing more indispensable free or open fonts, some of them being
neither in Fedora nor in our wishlist yet.

http://lwn.net/Articles/315872/
(subscription required right now, will go free in less than a week)

Volunteers to package those or at least add them to our wishlist would
be welcome. The free and open font landscape is really moving now, and
the quality and breadth of its font offerings is now a distribution
differentiator.


◾◾◾ Review status ◾◾◾

At this time there are no un-reviewed font packages in Fedora bugzilla.
However, several reviews have been open for quite a long time with their
requesters not acting on review comments.

Please do respond to review comments. Reviewing packages is tedious
ungrateful work and getting no response after one is demotivating.


◾◾◾ New packages ◾◾◾

Ignoring renamings ctan-musixtex-fonts, dustin-dustismo-roman-fonts,
dustin-dustismo-sans-fonts, hanazono-fonts, google-droid-sans-fonts,
google-droid-sans-mono-font, google-droid-serif-fonts,
serafettin-cartoon-fonts, and unikurd-web-font are now available in the
repository.

The most user-visible of those are probably the Droid fonts, but Dustimo
had been waited for a long time.

Several other fonts previously hidden deep inside apps have now been
exposed as part of the ongoing F11 auditing and repackaging. The
complete set of changes is documented as usual:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_inclusion_history

Several new packagers worked on those and on other packages not pushed
yet and I want to thank them publicly for their contribution to a better
Fedora.


◾◾◾ Web font surveys ◾◾◾

Fedora 10 shipped with an openjdk plugin that should be complete enough
to run web font surveys. There is no reason left for Fedora users not to
participate in them, and help web designers select fonts that work well
with Fedora browsers. Please take the time to run those:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Linux_fonts_on_the_web:_CSS_and_font_surveys


◾◾◾ Better fonts whiteboard ◾◾◾

The desktop team has added a whiteboard page to the wiki to help
identify the software changes needed to improve Fedora fonts and text
handling.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Desktop/Whiteboards/BetterFonts

Please contribute comments and complements to this page to help Fedora
get better.


◾◾◾ Font autoinstallation ◾◾◾

Rumors on irc are that the feature is advancing fast. Hopefully we'll
have finished cleaning up our font packages before they need to be
rebuild to add auto-install metadata. Automating this operation requires
clean packages free of historic cruft.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AutomaticFontInstallation

And that's all for this issue, thank you for reading it to its end.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

_______________________________________________
Fedora-devel-announce mailing list
Fedora-devel-announce redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-announce

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]