Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Hi Nicolas, On Tuesday 24 July 2007 22:33, you wrote: > Same here. I enjoyed Debconf a lot. Thanks for all the hard work. > Enjoyed being able to watch the video recordings too :) Glad to hear :) > > - feedback period is complete (jan 31 2007) but the description or README > > mentions it still... (minor, I would still sponsor it like this, but you > > should fix it :) > > Yes, the feedback period is over, but it will still take a while for the > final font to be designed and released, so the current design reviews > are still very much worth uploading even thought they reflect are WIP. > > I've added a note about this in the debian/control. No need to change > the changelog entries in FONTLOG.txt. Hm, ok. I thought about fixing README instead, but... > > - licence of the packaging? not mentioned in debian/copyright > Mmm, seems I've missed that. Fairly new it seems, haven't seen it as > such in maint-guide or most other font packages. Will add that. Thanks. :-) > > - control/description mentions authors, debian/copyright doesnt > > - AndikaDevRev(A-G).ttf - are those different fonts or different > > revisions? > They have glyph variations. The differences are described on > http://scripts.sil.org/Andika_technical Maybe put that info into README (or somewhere else in the package) too? > The updated debian/ is committed the Alioth svn and the new source > package is on: http://yosch.org/packages/debian /me looks. regards, Holger pgpULDnSiKniU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi Nicolas, > > it was good to meet you in Edinburgh! Same here. I enjoyed Debconf a lot. Thanks for all the hard work. Enjoyed being able to watch the video recordings too :) > On Saturday 09 June 2007 21:57, you wrote: The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is released when can do a rename). >>> Hmmm. This means, they will need to go through NEW twice :-/ Wouldn't it >>> be better (and have the same effect) to note that in the versionnumber >>> and package description? >> OK, so I took your advice: it's better at this stage to keep the initial >> ITP name. Makes it easier for you and the ftp-master team. > > ok, cool :) > >> The design review status is made clear in the packaging description and >> the changelog. > > Great, was that already in ttf-sil-andika-desrev_0.001-2.dsc ? > >> Will be putting up the new source package shortly. > > :) > > Probably not, as my remarks file is from the 28th of may (arrg! sorry for > taking so long...!) > > Anyway, those were the remarks I had at that time and against 0.001-2: > > - linda+lintian clean, nice > - feedback period is complete (jan 31 2007) but the description or README > mentions it still... (minor, I would still sponsor it like this, but you > should fix it :) Yes, the feedback period is over, but it will still take a while for the final font to be designed and released, so the current design reviews are still very much worth uploading even thought they reflect are WIP. I've added a note about this in the debian/control. No need to change the changelog entries in FONTLOG.txt. > - licence of the packaging? not mentioned in debian/copyright Mmm, seems I've missed that. Fairly new it seems, haven't seen it as such in maint-guide or most other font packages. Will add that. Thanks. > - version: 0.0.desrev-2007.05.08-2 / ttf-sil-andika - you said above this is > resolved/changed 0.001-desrev3 > - control/description mentions authors, debian/copyright doesnt > - AndikaDevRev(A-G).ttf - are those different fonts or different revisions? They have glyph variations. The differences are described on http://scripts.sil.org/Andika_technical > I guess the only issue which really blocks sponsoring is the copyright and > naming stuff, the rest would be nice if you could fix/enhance it. > > Can you point me to a new source package? If the blocking stuff is fixed, > I'll > upload immediatly this time :-) The updated debian/ is committed the Alioth svn and the new source package is on: http://yosch.org/packages/debian > regards, > Holger (still sorry for taking so long to send this short mail...) No problems at all for the delay, and thanks a lot for the sponsoring :) -- Nicolas Spalinger http://scripts.sil.org http://pkg-fonts.alioth.debian.org https://launchpad.net/people/fonts -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Hi Nicolas, it was good to meet you in Edinburgh! On Saturday 09 June 2007 21:57, you wrote: > >> The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the > >> design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage > >> but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is > >> released when can do a rename). > > > > Hmmm. This means, they will need to go through NEW twice :-/ Wouldn't it > > be better (and have the same effect) to note that in the versionnumber > > and package description? > OK, so I took your advice: it's better at this stage to keep the initial > ITP name. Makes it easier for you and the ftp-master team. ok, cool :) > The design review status is made clear in the packaging description and > the changelog. Great, was that already in ttf-sil-andika-desrev_0.001-2.dsc ? > Will be putting up the new source package shortly. :) Probably not, as my remarks file is from the 28th of may (arrg! sorry for taking so long...!) Anyway, those were the remarks I had at that time and against 0.001-2: - linda+lintian clean, nice - feedback period is complete (jan 31 2007) but the description or README mentions it still... (minor, I would still sponsor it like this, but you should fix it :) - licence of the packaging? not mentioned in debian/copyright - version: 0.0.desrev-2007.05.08-2 / ttf-sil-andika - you said above this is resolved/changed - control/description mentions authors, debian/copyright doesnt - AndikaDevRev(A-G).ttf - are those different fonts or different revisions? I guess the only issue which really blocks sponsoring is the copyright and naming stuff, the rest would be nice if you could fix/enhance it. Can you point me to a new source package? If the blocking stuff is fixed, I'll upload immediatly this time :-) regards, Holger (still sorry for taking so long to send this short mail...) pgp3qFXiCB5bP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
>> The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the >> design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage >> but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is >> released when can do a rename). > > Hmmm. This means, they will need to go through NEW twice :-/ Wouldn't it be > better (and have the same effect) to note that in the versionnumber and > package description? > > Or did you already thought about that and came to the above decission? OK, so I took your advice: it's better at this stage to keep the initial ITP name. Makes it easier for you and the ftp-master team. The design review status is made clear in the packaging description and the changelog. Will be putting up the new source package shortly. Thanks, -- Nicolas Spalinger http://scripts.sil.org http://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-fonts/ https://launchpad.net/people/fonts signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Holger Levsen a écrit : Hey Nicolas, On Tuesday 08 May 2007 21:57, you wrote: Thanks for the ping. (Just got back from LGM2 where I had a talk on open fonts). Hehe :) I hope you had fun! Yep, it was amazing. The next step is the BoF on open fonts @debconf. The updated Andika Debian packaging with the new design review (including sources) is now available on http://yosch.org/packages/debian The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is released when can do a rename). Hmmm. This means, they will need to go through NEW twice :-/ Wouldn't it be better (and have the same effect) to note that in the versionnumber and package description? Or did you already thought about that and came to the above decission? Actually yes, there was some thinking involved. But it happened after the IPT. This is what upstream designers would prefer to reflect the naming given to tarballs for other platforms. No worries about the NEW delay. How long do you expect will it take until the font becomes "final"/ready? The designers are still gathering feedback. It's a long process. It will take months. They will adjust the design as needed and draw all the other glyphs that are needed to complete the full set and make Andika a truly global font like Doulos SIL and Charis SIL. The next stages are - Andika Basic - Andika Regular - Andika Bold, Italic, and Bold Italic But it's already very useful as such. No real need to wait for the final version. OTOH if you have specific needs and wishes, now is a great time to give feedback. Your sponsorship much appreciated :-) Ok, waiting for your reply on the above and then I'll go :) Excellent. Thanks :) regards, Holger -- Nicolas
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Hey Nicolas, On Tuesday 08 May 2007 21:57, you wrote: > Thanks for the ping. (Just got back from LGM2 where I had a talk on open > fonts). Hehe :) I hope you had fun! > The updated Andika Debian packaging with the new design review > (including sources) is now available on > http://yosch.org/packages/debian > > The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the > design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage > but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is > released when can do a rename). Hmmm. This means, they will need to go through NEW twice :-/ Wouldn't it be better (and have the same effect) to note that in the versionnumber and package description? Or did you already thought about that and came to the above decission? How long do you expect will it take until the font becomes "final"/ready? > Your sponsorship much appreciated :-) Ok, waiting for your reply on the above and then I'll go :) regards, Holger pgpqwAwsGYVkT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi Nicolas, > > On Thursday 12 April 2007 19:44, you wrote: >> I was waiting for the end of the freeze before asking for sponsorship. > > Etch has been released by now, so... :) > > And we need ttf-sil-andika in unstable, to upload tuxtype and tuxmath. > >> In the meantime, there's been new design reviews released so I'll >> adjust the packaging and do some more testing. > > Did that happen yet? > > > > regards, > Holger (still willing to sponsor) Hi Holger, Thanks for the ping. (Just got back from LGM2 where I had a talk on open fonts). The updated Andika Debian packaging with the new design review (including sources) is now available on http://yosch.org/packages/debian The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is released when can do a rename). Your sponsorship much appreciated :-) Cheers, -- Nicolas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Hi Nicolas, On Thursday 12 April 2007 19:44, you wrote: > I was waiting for the end of the freeze before asking for sponsorship. Etch has been released by now, so... :) And we need ttf-sil-andika in unstable, to upload tuxtype and tuxmath. > In the meantime, there's been new design reviews released so I'll > adjust the packaging and do some more testing. Did that happen yet? regards, Holger (still willing to sponsor) pgpAl7GMkg2uW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Hey, On Thursday 12 April 2007 19:44, Nicolas Spalinger wrote: > the packaging for ttf-sil-andika is available in the pkg-fonts Alioth > repository: > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-fonts/packages/ttf-sil-andika/ cool. > I was waiting for the end of the freeze before asking for sponsorship. Ok, fair enough :) > In the meantime, there's been new design reviews released so I'll > adjust the packaging and do some more testing. "design reviews"? Updated fonts or reviews of your packaging or..? > Your thoughts on the current packaging welcome. I just checked out the above URL and only got a debian/ directory. How am I supposed to build it? ;) As far as I can say from (briefly) looking at those files without building the package, the packaging looks good. > Thanks for your sponsorship offer. I'll let you know when the source > package is ready. Ok. Any estimate? ;) regards, Holger pgpviclbzVuLy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi Nicolas, > > you filed an ITP for ttf-sil-andika in January. Did you make any progress on > this since then? We are using the font for the game tuxmath and therefore we > would like to be able to use a package providing this font. > > If you need help with packaging or a sponsor for uploading, I'm happy to help. > > > regards, > Holger Hi Holger, the packaging for ttf-sil-andika is available in the pkg-fonts Alioth repository: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-fonts/packages/ttf-sil-andika/ I was waiting for the end of the freeze before asking for sponsorship. In the meantime, there's been new design reviews released so I'll adjust the packaging and do some more testing. Your thoughts on the current packaging welcome. Thanks for your sponsorship offer. I'll let you know when the source package is ready. regards, -- Nicolas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#406864: status of the ttf-sil-andika ITP
Hi Nicolas, you filed an ITP for ttf-sil-andika in January. Did you make any progress on this since then? We are using the font for the game tuxmath and therefore we would like to be able to use a package providing this font. If you need help with packaging or a sponsor for uploading, I'm happy to help. regards, Holger pgpEUkj4KVLFK.pgp Description: PGP signature
