Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Alejandro Rios P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Package name: libming-fonts-openoffice Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : OpenOffice.org dev@openoffice.org * URL : http://www.openoffice.org/ * License : GPL Description : Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation These are the OpenOffice Fonts converted for use with libming, .which is a library for SWF (Flash) File creation. .These fonts canNOT be used with X11 or for printing. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers breezy-updates APT policy: (500, 'breezy-updates'), (500, 'breezy-security'), (500, 'breezy') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-9-686 Locale: LANG=es_CO.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=es_CO.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Hi, Am Dienstag, den 08.08.2006, 02:28 -0500 schrieb Alejandro Rios P.: .These fonts canNOT be used with X11 or for printing. I suggest writing this as 'can NOT'. It's easier to parse and (with the idea of descriptions' translations in mind) comes closer to what happens in a translation -- at least for the languages I know. Regards Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 09:28 schrieb Alejandro Rios P.: * Package name: libming-fonts-openoffice Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : OpenOffice.org dev@openoffice.org * URL : http://www.openoffice.org/ * License : GPL Description : Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation These are the OpenOffice Fonts converted for use with libming, Which OpenOffice Fonts? OpenSymbol? The other fonts included in OOo is ttf-bitstream-vera, Not to mention the program is named OpenOffice.org. WITH the .org. For trademark reasons. So *if* you reintroduce this package (see below) please name it correctly. And more importantly: [Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:30:29 -0500] [ftpmaster: James Troup] Removed the following packages from unstable: libming | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | source, alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc libming-dev | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc libming-fonts-openoffice | 0.1-2 | source, all libming-util | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc libswf-perl | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc php4-ming | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc python2.1-ming | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc python2.2-ming | 0.2a.cvs20030716-2 | alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc Closed bugs: 166973 166990 --- Reason --- RoQA; orphaned, dead upstream, grave bugs, unused. -- Did that change? Did you fix the grave bugs? Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Am Dienstag 08 August 2006 09:28 schrieb Alejandro Rios P.: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Alejandro Rios P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Package name: libming-fonts-openoffice Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : OpenOffice.org dev@openoffice.org * URL : http://www.openoffice.org/ * License : GPL Description : Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation These are the OpenOffice Fonts converted for use with libming, .which is a library for SWF (Flash) File creation. .These fonts canNOT be used with X11 or for printing. Are those fonts manually converted? If not, wouldn't it be better to convert them as needed instead of yet-another-incompatible-font-package? (In which package are the OpenOffice Fonts?). HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 09:28 schrieb Alejandro Rios P.: * Package name: libming-fonts-openoffice Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : OpenOffice.org dev@openoffice.org * URL : http://www.openoffice.org/ * License : GPL Description : Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation These are the OpenOffice Fonts converted for use with libming, I already have package for these fonts prepared as part of the ming sounrce package, and am awaiting some feedback from some of the packages that will use them. Feedback from others would be welcome as well. deb http://www4.netsweng.com/~anderson/ming-unstable/ binary/ [Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:30:29 -0500] [ftpmaster: James Troup] Removed the following packages from unstable: --- Reason --- RoQA; orphaned, dead upstream, grave bugs, unused. -- Did that change? Did you fix the grave bugs? I have adopted the libming packages, and there has been a new version in unstable for a few weeks now. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Hendrik Sattler wrote: Are those fonts manually converted? If not, wouldn't it be better to convert them as needed instead of yet-another-incompatible-font-package? The long term plan is for libming to be able to read in TTF fonts directly, but that's not there yet. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Hi, Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 14:13 schrieb Stuart Anderson: On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Hendrik Sattler wrote: Are those fonts manually converted? If not, wouldn't it be better to convert them as needed instead of yet-another-incompatible-font-package? The long term plan is for libming to be able to read in TTF fonts directly, but that's not there yet. YOu didn't answer his question. Are they manually converted? Or how are they converted? Can they be converted during-build of some other package (where the fonts are from, when there's OOo fonts I mean ttf-opensymbol and ttf-bitstream-vera). Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: Are those fonts manually converted? YOu didn't answer his question. Fair enough. The coffee hadn't quite kicked in yet. 8-) Are they manually converted? Or how are they converted? I wasn't sure what Alejandro had in mind, so I didn't want to answer for him. In the past however, that package was made from some fonts that were manually converted and uploaded to the ming FTP site. The tool that was used for that conversion a few years ago has suffered some bitrot. Can they be converted during-build of some other package (where the fonts are from, when there's OOo fonts I mean ttf-opensymbol and ttf-bitstream-vera). Yes, the packages I have prepared are built as part of the rest of the ming package. The ming source package Build-depends on the package that contains the TTF fonts that will be converted into a libming font package. Upstream ming (and the libming-util package) now includes an updated version of the tool that is used to convert the fonts. It is now trivial to create additional libming format font packages, so some of the feedback I'd like to receive, is which fonts would it be useful to have already converted and packaged. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 14:47 schrieb Stuart Anderson: Yes, the packages I have prepared are built as part of the rest of the ming package. The ming source package Build-depends on the package that contains the TTF fonts that will be converted into a libming font package. Upstream ming (and the libming-util package) now includes an updated version of the tool that is used to convert the fonts. OK. Now, I fetched your -openoffice pakcage and saw that (as I guessed) it just does OpenSymbol. Can you please name it -opensymbol (to show that it is the opensymbol font from ttf-opensymbol) then? Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
close 381992 thanks Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 14:11 schrieb Stuart Anderson: On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 09:28 schrieb Alejandro Rios P.: * Package name: libming-fonts-openoffice Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : OpenOffice.org dev@openoffice.org * URL : http://www.openoffice.org/ * License : GPL Description : Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation These are the OpenOffice Fonts converted for use with libming, I already have package for these fonts prepared as part of the ming sounrce package, and am awaiting some feedback from some of the packages that will use them. Feedback from others would be welcome as well. deb http://www4.netsweng.com/~anderson/ming-unstable/ binary/ So Alejandros ITP is bogus. I feel free to close it then. Alejandro (in case you read that in the buglog since your §%§ mailserver doesn't accept mail): The libming maintainer (especially when those font packages come out of the ming source pkg) is the best person to maintain this. Especially as there's a tool to build those fonts proper. [Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:30:29 -0500] [ftpmaster: James Troup] Removed the following packages from unstable: --- Reason --- RoQA; orphaned, dead upstream, grave bugs, unused. -- Did that change? Did you fix the grave bugs? I have adopted the libming packages, and there has been a new version in unstable for a few weeks now. Ah, yes. That makes the ITP obsolete since*if* this is to be packages it should be either from libming (which Stuart maintains) or on-the-fly converted from the font packages it's based on. But this doesn't answer whether the grave bugs in the fonts was fixed. Alejandro ITPed 0.1 again which supposedly to that removal log has those grave bugs. Or that might be libming only, I don't know.. But in any case, this were pre-connverted things afaik... In the meanwhile, you answered on -devel that it's generated during the build from opens___.ttf (which is the only font there). Please name it -opensymbol. So Alejandros ITP is bogus. I feel free to close it then. Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: OK. Now, I fetched your -openoffice pakcage and saw that (as I guessed) it just does OpenSymbol. Can you please name it -opensymbol (to show that it is the opensymbol font from ttf-opensymbol) then? Yes, that would be a better naming scheme. I was a little bit concerned with the migration path for anyone that had the old package installed, but I suppose the right set of Conflicts/Replaces/Provides would cover that? Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 15:10 schrieb Stuart Anderson: On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: OK. Now, I fetched your -openoffice pakcage and saw that (as I guessed) it just does OpenSymbol. Can you please name it -opensymbol (to show that it is the opensymbol font from ttf-opensymbol) then? Yes, that would be a better naming scheme. I was a little bit concerned with the migration path for anyone that had the old package installed, but I suppose the right set of Conflicts/Replaces/Provides would cover that? stable doesn't have the package anymore and oldstable is unsupported. And dist-upgrades skipping one release is not supported. But yes, I think so. If not, you can add a transitional package, although I won't like it because of the bogus name... Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: stable doesn't have the package anymore and oldstable is unsupported. And dist-upgrades skipping one release is not supported. But yes, I think so. If not, you can add a transitional package, although I won't like it because of the bogus name... So this should cover it? Package: ming-fonts-opensymbol Conflicts: ming-fonts-openoffice Replaces: ming-fonts-openoffice Provides: ming-fonts-openoffice Interestingly, the ttf-opensymbol package places the font in the openoffice directory. /usr/share/fonts/truetype/openoffice/opens___.ttf Does this need to be fixed? I have my package putting its results in the same directory name (only the last part, the parent parent directory is different) as is used for the ttf files, but I think I can fix that easily enough for libming-fonts-opensymbol. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Hi, Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 15:32 schrieb Stuart Anderson: So this should cover it? Package: ming-fonts-opensymbol Conflicts: ming-fonts-openoffice Replaces: ming-fonts-openoffice Provides: ming-fonts-openoffice No, Replaces:/Povides:/Conflicts: libming-... ^^^ important, because woody's package is named like that. for packages not yet in the archive (your ming-* you can do that but you don't need to; but you *need* the lib there) Interestingly, the ttf-opensymbol package places the font in the openoffice directory. /usr/share/fonts/truetype/openoffice/opens___.ttf Does this need to be fixed? Yeah, we could make that opensymbol, good catch. Minor point, though since it's just package contents and you normally should not need to fiddle around with that font anyway ;-). And it's OpenOffice.org which provides that font anyway. Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Am Dienstag 08 August 2006 14:47 schrieb Stuart Anderson: Yes, the packages I have prepared are built as part of the rest of the ming package. The ming source package Build-depends on the package that contains the TTF fonts that will be converted into a libming font package. Upstream ming (and the libming-util package) now includes an updated version of the tool that is used to convert the fonts. Would it be possible to convert them at installation time? There would be two essential options: 1. creation at installation time: - possibly only one package for all ming fonts (the tool) - less packages on the mirrors 2. building a ming font package for the wanted TTF font packages I'd go for option one with a small util that: 1. installs the ttf font package e.g. via apt 2. converts to ming fonts 3. optionally uninstalls the ttf font package HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Hendrik Sattler wrote: Would it be possible to convert them at installation time? Yes, it would be possible. There would be two essential options: 1. creation at installation time: - possibly only one package for all ming fonts (the tool) The tool is currently provided as part of the libming-util package. - less packages on the mirrors 2. building a ming font package for the wanted TTF font packages Subject to the input I receive on this, I estimate that only 3-4 font packages would need to be provided to cover the commonly used fonts. I don't want an explosion of packages in an effort to convert all fonts that are available, but I do think it would be good to provide the common fonts that are used by applications that depend on libming. I'd go for option one with a small util that: 1. installs the ttf font package e.g. via apt 2. converts to ming fonts 3. optionally uninstalls the ttf font package I have so far choosen the other option because I felt that when installing on a production server, I wanted to _not_ do the extra work of converting the fonts as part of the installation, nor did I want to have to go perform a manual step on multiple servers. This could also lead to other applications (which depend on libming) having to build the fonts in their postinstall script, and there could be multiple applications that need the same font. It is still possible to perform option #1 since the tool is provided, but I would like for the common cases to be effortless for the end user. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote: No, Replaces:/Povides:/Conflicts: libming-... ^^^ important, because woody's package is named like that. for packages not yet in the archive (your ming-* you can do that but you don't need to; but you *need* the lib there) Doh.. of course. That's what I _meant_, but not what I typed. Thanks for catching that. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Software Engineering http://www.netsweng.com/ 1024D/37A79149: 0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Hi Stuart, El mar, 08-08-2006 a las 08:11 -0400, Stuart Anderson escribió: I already have package for these fonts prepared as part of the ming sounrce package, and am awaiting some feedback from some of the packages that will use them. Feedback from others would be welcome as well. deb http://www4.netsweng.com/~anderson/ming-unstable/ binary/ Those fonts are needed to build the op-panel package [0]. [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=323689 I could upload the new ming package when it's ready. Just drop me a note. kind regards, -- Santiago Ruano Rincón signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Hello. I've talk to Stuart since a lot time ago about all this, but forgot to look over his late work on the fonts part that was missing. I tough that was a little bit more delyaed than it is. That is my fault for not checking and I'm sorry. Now I will test the fonts against my op-panel package, which is my own responsability now. I also want to apologize for the problems I had with my email account. This was a situation that escaped my control and I hope you all people never get in that situation so people like Rene Engelhard don't treat you like this: Alejandro (in case you read that in the buglog since your §%§ mailserver doesn't accept mail)... Regards, and thanks for your time. -- Alejandro Ríos Peña signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: Bug#381992: ITP: libming-fonts-openoffice -- Fonts for use with the Ming Library for SWF Creation
Hi, Alejandro R?os P. wrote: Alejandro (in case you read that in the buglog since your ??%?? mailserver doesn't accept mail)... Well, it's not personal. It just the mailserver not accepting mail and that makes problems for reaching you (as in case for this ITP). As mail is to debian communication channel nr.1 this is not good. It could also have been the fact that you don't have control over it (provider, or whatever) Again: It was not meant in offense to you and if you understood that so I apologoize... Regards, Rene signature.asc Description: Digital signature
