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

Re: Liberation fonts package.



I'll just copy some points I've already made on the marketing list where
Liberation was announced:

> The package needs work first:
> - the spec does not follow our current rules (forces a fontconfig dep)
> - it lacks any form of fontconfig setup, which is required if you want
> the ms core font substitution to actually work
> - the license file is not properly encoded and is dumped in the wrong
> place
> 
> Also:
> - a lot of obvious questions are not answered on the web site or in
> the package [1]
> - the screen and print priority of the font was never discussed in
> Fedora instances, which is not a problem for a minor font but is if
> you want it to be one of the primary distro ones

[1]

> 1. Is this a long-term Red Hat project or will it go stagnant after
> initial funding dries out ? (Luxi and Vera-like)
> 
> 2. Does Red Hat intend to morph it in a community project (with the
> usual wiki+bugzilla+open SCM infrastructure) or will contributions be
> restricted to the contracted foundry (ie will it need a fork like Vera
> before joining community space ?)
> 
> 3. what is the reasonning behind the licensing choice? Most recent
> FLOSS font projects seem to be gravitation towards OFL, and licensing
> differences make cross-pollination difficult
> 
> 4. will unicode coverage ever extend past Latin, Greek and Cyrillic ?
> Is Latin, Greek and Cyrillic support limited to most common glyphs or
> does it also includes regional variants (welsh, catalan, coptic, etc)
> 
> 5. is it intended to be the new RHEL or Fedora default font set or
> just a windows compatibility pack ?
> 
> 6. why did Red Hat choose to launch a new font project instead of
> improving one of the existing FLOSS fonts? Was metric compatibility
> the main reason? If so is it not dangerous to target the windows
> 2000/XP font set when vista just introduced a new default font set ?
> 
7. who is supposed to field this kind of question?
8. who is supposed to push the package through the Fedora QA process?

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

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


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