On 06/16/2018 03:57 PM, Alexis Murzeau wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:31:48 +0100 Sean Whitton > <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> wrote: >> Hello Vasudev, >> >> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 05:16:05PM +0530, Vasudev Kamath wrote: >>> >>> I read through and prepared a version to experimental which symlinks >>> fa-solid-900.ttf as fontawesome-webfont.ttf. I've uploaded it to >>> experimental, can you please check if this helps?. >>> >>> @Others Please let me know if this new version in experimental with >>> suggestion from Thomas improves situation in your cases. >> >> This does not help the mkdocs-bootstrap case. That appears to need the >> .woff2 font. >> >> -- >> Sean Whitton > > Hi, > > This and openstack-dashboard install failure require more symlinks and > files from v4. > > Isn't reverting the package to v4 while creating a new one for the > version 5 (say fonts-font-awesome-5) better to handle all these v4/5 > breaks ?
I agree, also because even with the symlinks, there would be still 4 missing glyphs in the openstack-dashboard (I tried and survey it). Though, I could probably find replacements in fa-solid-900, it'd be nicer to just not break things. > I'm not sure it is a good solution trying to patch fonts-font-awesome v5 > to be compatible with v4 while upstream might continue to even more > break things with v4 later. > > Subsequent maintenance on the v4 package should not require much work as > upstream says they don't plan any further versions on the v4 branch [1]: I agree. > So this v4 package would be dropped once other packages move to > fonts-font-awesome-5 with proper upgrade path (ie. without hacks to fake > v4 with v5). Especially packages that use sphinx RTD theme where > upstream still use v4 and it seems many packages actually have a > theme.css based on that theme. > > I myself tried to patch theme.css to use fonts-font-awesome 5 shim but > its a ugly big approximate patch that happen to mostly work :( [2] > > What do you think about this ? I also would like to highlight that what you're describing here is the workflow of a transition, which is what Debian has been doing for *years*. Not only this is natural in Debian, but it is also very much recommended when breakage occurs. I'm by the way a bit frustrated that this process is taking so long. This has a huge impact in the maintenance of a big dozen of my packages, since Horizon can't be installed. Reverting is really not a lot of work. Can we get this done soon, as it seems to be the consensus? If the current font-awesome maintainer is busy, maybe someone else (me?) can do the work? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)