[Bug 468823] Review Request: hanazono-fonts - Japanese Mincho-typeface TrueType font

[bugzilla redhat com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468823


Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas mailhot laposte net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |besfahbo redhat com,
                   |                            |tcallawa redhat com
               Flag|                            |needinfo?(tagoh redhat com)




--- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas mailhot laposte net>  2008-11-09 16:56:39 EDT ---
Since nobody bites, I'll take this. First review pass

1. you're packaging a font with a new license. While at first view it seems ok,
you still need spot to approve it and put it on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal_considerations_for_fonts

2. please follow the font packaging process outlined on 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle
and in particular create a wiki page that describes your font and can be
referenced in release notes

(a wiki page template is available there
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_description_template )

3. your fontconfig priority (59) is a little low, our guidelines states CJK
fonts should be in the 65-69 range
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#Simple_priority_lists

Of course Behdad has the last say on this, so if you convince him to ok it I'll
let this pass.

4. your fontconfig rule is a bit more convoluted than what we usually do. It
probably works but please get Behdad to review it (and ok it there).

5. please also alias the font the other way, so fontconfig knows it should use
serif fonts to complete HanaMin
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#Generic_names

6. please send your fontconfig file to hanazano upstream so it's included in
their next release once you're happy with it

7. you can drop the -f argument to fc-cache for releases ≥ Fedora 9

8. please use the defattr suggested by guidelines %defattr(644,root,root,755)

9. it's a little easier to review a package when the fields are in the same
order as in rpmdevtool's  spectemplate-fonts.spec (cosmetic, you can ignore it,
just take it into account for your next font package)

All in all this was a pleasant spec file to review and I'll have no problem
approving it once those little problems are taken care of

→ NEEDINFO in the meanwhile

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.