Re: Finish Font Birth
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Jens Petersen wrote: >> - In case that I want to push updates: Can I use the >> common/cvs-import script again? > > Yes, that should work - if not please file a bug. Well, I did that once and weird things happened. I had to learn cvs to clean the mess. It was good though. In the end, I learned something useful. However I would suggest using the procedure given in the guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/UpdatingPackageHowTo Paul, I think you need to spend a little more time in the wiki. Most of the questions you ask have direct answers there. Feel free to ask questions about parts that you don't understand. Orcan ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: Finish Font Birth
> herewith I'm announcing the birth of two new fonts - vollkorn-fonts > and > yanone-tagesschrift-fonts - in the fedora universe. Thank you > - Comps integration: I'm going to register them only in 'fonts' as > 'optional' (not in any xxx-support group because they only provide > basic > latin glyphs). When I updated the xml-file I simply upload the > changes via CVS and that it? Yes that is fine: it is called "cvs commit". > - In case that I want to push updates: Can I use the > common/cvs-import script again? Yes, that should work - if not please file a bug. Jens ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Finish Font Birth
Hey, herewith I'm announcing the birth of two new fonts - vollkorn-fonts and yanone-tagesschrift-fonts - in the fedora universe. I want to thank anyone who helped me to do this (yes, I'm a bit proud of myself :p) As usual I have some more questions: - Comps integration: I'm going to register them only in 'fonts' as 'optional' (not in any xxx-support group because they only provide basic latin glyphs). When I updated the xml-file I simply upload the changes via CVS and that it? No need to tell special people about it or file bugs? - In case that I want to push updates: Can I use the common/cvs-import script again? (This would be great because it makes things easy for me) regards, Paul signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Thank you all for the packaging!
Dear list, Karsten Wade just published this very nice article on his blog: http://iquaid.org/2009/02/01/font-rock/ This is a tribute to the group efforts, and all the work you've contributed to make fonts in Fedora shine. I know that for many of you it was/is your first package, and how intimidating it is to start when you have little distribution experience. We've gone a long way from the negative packaging count of Fedora 7. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_inclusion_history Thank you all, I'm certain Fedora 11 users will notice the difference! -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: koji build results
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 15:03 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le dimanche 01 février 2009 à 19:20 +0530, Ankur Sinha a écrit : > > > Shouldnt cf-bonveno-fonts have also come across this error while > > building the f-9 package? That one built perfectly. Just a query. > > Bonveno sfds probably have not been created at the same time, and do not > use whatever new fontforge feature F-9 fontforge does not understand. > > sfd is an evolving format that changes slightly every other fontforge > release. > okay, Then ill just ignore the failure. regards, Ankur ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: koji build results
Le dimanche 01 février 2009 à 19:20 +0530, Ankur Sinha a écrit : > Shouldnt cf-bonveno-fonts have also come across this error while > building the f-9 package? That one built perfectly. Just a query. Bonveno sfds probably have not been created at the same time, and do not use whatever new fontforge feature F-9 fontforge does not understand. sfd is an evolving format that changes slightly every other fontforge release. -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: koji build results
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 14:25 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le dimanche 01 février 2009 à 18:36 +0530, Ankur Sinha a écrit : > > hi, > > > > I built packages on koji for the fonts.. > > > > only this one failed : > > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1097228name=build.log > > > > Says cannot find file. > > No, it says it can't read the file, which probably just means that the > fontforge version in F-9 is too old to build old standard. > > “OldStandard-Bold.sfd is not in a known format (or is so badly corrupted > as to be unreadable)” > > Not a huge problem, F-9 is an old release, its users will just have to > upgrade to F-10 to get your font. It's not worth getting worried about. > > PS do not hesitate to post to the list like others, you'll get more and > better advice this way > hi, Shouldnt cf-bonveno-fonts have also come across this error while building the f-9 package? That one built perfectly. Just a query. regards, Ankur ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: Lost in translation, part II: Lost in orthographies
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > No, I'm saying completeness should not be a requirement to create a new > language group, but the aim should be to help people identify the > missing bits so they can ping someone else (like you:;)) to provide > them. Got it. I guess this really means I should try to document the process, like the great documentation I'm seeing at the fonts sig! (not that i can reach the quality ;)) Roozbeh ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: Lost in translation, part II: Lost in orthographies
Le dimanche 01 février 2009 à 05:34 -0800, Roozbeh Pournader a écrit : > On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Nicolas Mailhot > > What you want is to help the different contributors to a language group > > to: > > — identify other bits are missing > > — ping in the right place so they get added > > > > Otherwise everyone will just wait for everyone else. > > I'm sorry Nicolas, but I don't understand. Would you consider > rewording? Are you saying that I should not have been trying to create > the missing orth files myself? Or fix the buggy ones? No, I'm saying completeness should not be a requirement to create a new language group, but the aim should be to help people identify the missing bits so they can ping someone else (like you:;)) to provide them. -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: Lost in translation, part II: Lost in orthographies
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > I'd be very careful to redefine tagalog for example. The tagalog script > is definitely not latin and has a specific unicode block, iso 15924 > script tag, and specific supporting fonts > > http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/iso15924-codes.html > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Pmorrow_Tagalog_Doctrina_1593_fonts No worries. I know all that. According to the Unicode Standard, that script has not been much used for Tagalog since mid-1700s. The Tagalog script in Unicode is an archaic script only, mostly for scholarly use: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19846 > IMHO we've been conflating too many different notions (country, region, > language, script) in a few short locale tags and what you see is just > the system breaking appart for non-mainstream languages/scripts. That's very true. I've been talking with Behdad to try to do a bit or redesigning, and we had a few ideas, like this bug, trying to get BCP 47 into fontconfig and somehow solving the glibc locale naming problem: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19869 I would appreciate your feedback. (Of course, we can't fix this in this release.) > This is something for Behdad. I hear he's cutting a new fontconfig > version right now, you may want to catch him before he's done and the > projects wents back to its usual 6-8 months sleepiness ;). I'm working with him. Actually he insisted that I rush it :) > all the different parts of language support > are done by different groups with different agendas and different time > scales so of course initial support is going to be incomplete. Expecting > one contributor to provide all the parts in one go is illusory. > > What you want is to help the different contributors to a language group > to: > — identify other bits are missing > — ping in the right place so they get added > > Otherwise everyone will just wait for everyone else. I'm sorry Nicolas, but I don't understand. Would you consider rewording? Are you saying that I should not have been trying to create the missing orth files myself? Or fix the buggy ones? > Some people will claim that « full » language support means a system > dictionnary and thesaurus BTW, completeness is a slipery slope. I agree. But we are talking about very basic language support here. If we cannot bring up and show a language in a proper font, we cannot claim to support it. Our layout system would not know what which font to use, so it will be just DejaVu first, instead of a font that actually supports the full glyph set for a language. Since we're also doing the automatic language detection in RPM thing, wouldn't that be based on orth files too? How can we claim we support a language in Fedora if none of our font rpms would report that they support it? Also, the orth files are very simple, much easier to create than glibc locale files for example. Thanks a lot for all your time, :) Roozbeh ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: Lost in translation, part II: Lost in orthographies
Le samedi 31 janvier 2009 à 23:42 -0800, Roozbeh Pournader a écrit : > I was trying to avoid fontconfig, but it caught me at the end. Trying > to figure out which languages in comps are supported by which font, to > be able to include them in the language group, I compared the list of > languages in F11's comps file with the orthography lists fontconfig > supports. > > To my surprise, some were missing/problematic. The list is here: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/I18N/LanguageSupportCriteria/Missing_fontconfig I'd be very careful to redefine tagalog for example. The tagalog script is definitely not latin and has a specific unicode block, iso 15924 script tag, and specific supporting fonts http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/iso15924-codes.html http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Pmorrow_Tagalog_Doctrina_1593_fonts IMHO we've been conflating too many different notions (country, region, language, script) in a few short locale tags and what you see is just the system breaking appart for non-mainstream languages/scripts. > I also found quite a few problems with existing orth files in > fontconfig that I'm working on fixing: http://tinyurl.com/dbk6a8 This is something for Behdad. I hear he's cutting a new fontconfig version right now, you may want to catch him before he's done and the projects wents back to its usual 6-8 months sleepiness ;). > Since fontconfig support is critical for any language Fedora claims to > support [1], I think we should remove the language groups from comps > file if we don't have a fontconfig orthography file for it. That's not really helpful, all the different parts of language support are done by different groups with different agendas and different time scales so of course initial support is going to be incomplete. Expecting one contributor to provide all the parts in one go is illusory. What you want is to help the different contributors to a language group to: — identify other bits are missing — ping in the right place so they get added Otherwise everyone will just wait for everyone else. Some people will claim that « full » language support means a system dictionnary and thesaurus BTW, completeness is a slipery slope. > I went and > updated the language criteria page we have here, adding a fontconfig > step: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/I18N/LanguageSupportCriteria > > For the specific language cases, I went and filed upstream bugs > against fontconfig for all I could find, except for Berber, which is a > bit problematic by nature (language code used is actually for a family > of languages, glibc locales are incomplete, Latin/Tifinagh/Arabic > script division is not along country lines...). This again is because iso-639 is not well suited to identify scripts. > This is a report. I would appreciate help and feedback, especially > your thoughts about fontconfig .orth requirements for claiming > language support in Fedora. -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
