[opensuse-packaging] (In)Consistent Font Package Names
Hi, over the years, I've collected a bunch of great fonts in my home repository. However, it seems we don't have a consistent naming schema for fonts. Although the Packaging Guidelines[1] links to the old Wiki[2], the information therein is printed in red and I'm not sure how useful is this nowadays. This has some interesting effects. If you search for fonts like this: # zypper se font you will get _some_ but not all. For example, the popular Linux Libertine and DejaVu fonts are not listed. A user has to _know_ the name. IMHO this is not very intuitive and userfriendly. On the other side, we have lots of fonts which are very inconsistently named. Here are some examples: farsifonts fonts-arabic freefont gnu-unifont indic-fonts intlfonts-ttf xorg-x11-fonts From a usability perspective, it would be very convenient to have a consistent naming schema with a specific prefix (or suffix), for example a "-fonts" suffix. Ubuntu has the prefix "ttf-" for their packages: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?suite=natty§ion=all&arch=any&a... Fedora has the suffix "-fonts" for their packages: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/list/*-fonts*?_csrf_token=b272157... Another issue: Do we have a special repository dedicated only to fonts? I couldn't find any... Do you think this is useful? What do you think? -------- [1] http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines [2] http://old-en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Fonts_Policy#Package_layout_for_fonts -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com http://lizards.opensuse.org/author/thomas-schraitle/ SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
At Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:55:14 +0100, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
Hi,
over the years, I've collected a bunch of great fonts in my home repository. However, it seems we don't have a consistent naming schema for fonts. Although the Packaging Guidelines[1] links to the old Wiki[2], the information therein is printed in red and I'm not sure how useful is this nowadays.
This has some interesting effects. If you search for fonts like this:
# zypper se font
you will get _some_ but not all. For example, the popular Linux Libertine and DejaVu fonts are not listed. A user has to _know_ the name. IMHO this is not very intuitive and userfriendly.
True. (Though, this reminds me whether any possibility to search for RPM group...)
On the other side, we have lots of fonts which are very inconsistently named. Here are some examples:
farsifonts fonts-arabic freefont gnu-unifont indic-fonts intlfonts-ttf xorg-x11-fonts
From a usability perspective, it would be very convenient to have a consistent naming schema with a specific prefix (or suffix), for example a "-fonts" suffix.
Ubuntu has the prefix "ttf-" for their packages: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?suite=natty§ion=all&arch=any&a...
Fedora has the suffix "-fonts" for their packages: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/list/*-fonts*?_csrf_token=b272157...
Note that ttf- and -fonts aren't identical. For example, gnu-unifont definitely can't be renamed as ttf-gnu-unifont. If we group only "fonts", then -fonts suffix might make more sense. But, this doesn't mean it's better than giving ttf- prefix. It'll match with older bitmap fonts that user doesn't always want. And, adding -fonts to a package like gun-unifont would be strange. gnu-unifont-fonts? In most cases, prefixing would be better IMO. So, we need to make clear: - whether we group all fonts or only specific types (ttf, bitmap, etc); if we name for ttf, what we should do for otf? - whether to give a prefix or a suffix
Another issue: Do we have a special repository dedicated only to fonts? I couldn't find any... Do you think this is useful?
Until now, fonts packages are put in M17N project in general. Moving around would be OK, but we need the proper notification. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, thanks Takashi for your answers. On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 14:19:53 +0100 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
At Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:55:14 +0100, [...]
you will get _some_ but not all. For example, the popular Linux Libertine and DejaVu fonts are not listed. A user has to _know_ the name. IMHO this is not very intuitive and userfriendly.
True. (Though, this reminds me whether any possibility to search for RPM group...)
Yes, that would be another possibility. However, I doubt this option would be taken into account very often. ;)
[...]
Note that ttf- and -fonts aren't identical. For example, gnu-unifont definitely can't be renamed as ttf-gnu-unifont.
Probably, but see below. First of all, I don't want mess up things, it's just one thing that I've stumpled upon---and I think, we can do better. I would appreciate it if we could make it more consistent, but I know there might be some technical issues (dependency problems, ...) that prevents from doing so.
If we group only "fonts", then -fonts suffix might make more sense. But, this doesn't mean it's better than giving ttf- prefix. It'll match with older bitmap fonts that user doesn't always want.
If I search for "ttf-" the only fonts that I got are these: ttf-arphic ttf-arphic-bkai00mp ttf-arphic-bsmi00lp ttf-arphic-gbsn00lp ttf-arphic-gkai00mp ttf-arphic-ukai ttf-caslon ttf-wqy-zenhei Neither of the previous is a bitmap font, I guess.
And, adding -fonts to a package like gun-unifont would be strange. gnu-unifont-fonts? In most cases, prefixing would be better IMO.
Fedora uses this name: gnu-free-fonts (if this package contains the same fonts). Well, apart from the previous details, I see the following questions: 1. Do we really want to rename fonts? If yes, maybe we could use the "Provides" keyword in the spec file to hold the old name? 2. Should we use the Fedora or Ubuntu way? 3. Is it anywhere documented? 4. Probably it is useful to open a FATE request?
So, we need to make clear:
- whether we group all fonts or only specific types (ttf, bitmap, etc); if we name for ttf, what we should do for otf?
It seems neither Fedora nor Ubuntu distinguish OTF and TTF, so why should we? It make sense for bitmap vs. vector.
- whether to give a prefix or a suffix
I don't have any preferences, either way is as long it is consistent. :-)
Another issue: Do we have a special repository dedicated only to fonts? I couldn't find any... Do you think this is useful?
Until now, fonts packages are put in M17N project in general. Moving around would be OK, but we need the proper notification.
Ok. I just looked from the usability perspective when someone wants to incorporate a repository with fonts. Where should he get it from? What's the URL? etc. It was just an idea, if there technical issues than I'm totally fine with the M17N repo. :) Thanks! -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com | HRB 21284 SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
At Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:05:11 +0100, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
Hi,
thanks Takashi for your answers.
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 14:19:53 +0100 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
At Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:55:14 +0100, [...]
you will get _some_ but not all. For example, the popular Linux Libertine and DejaVu fonts are not listed. A user has to _know_ the name. IMHO this is not very intuitive and userfriendly.
True. (Though, this reminds me whether any possibility to search for RPM group...)
Yes, that would be another possibility. However, I doubt this option would be taken into account very often. ;)
Heh. The RPM group has nowadays less meaning, but it could be improved a bit more, in general.
[...]
Note that ttf- and -fonts aren't identical. For example, gnu-unifont definitely can't be renamed as ttf-gnu-unifont.
Probably, but see below.
First of all, I don't want mess up things, it's just one thing that I've stumpled upon---and I think, we can do better.
I would appreciate it if we could make it more consistent, but I know there might be some technical issues (dependency problems, ...) that prevents from doing so.
I guess the dependency shouldn't be a big issue when we do renaming correctly.
If we group only "fonts", then -fonts suffix might make more sense. But, this doesn't mean it's better than giving ttf- prefix. It'll match with older bitmap fonts that user doesn't always want.
If I search for "ttf-" the only fonts that I got are these:
ttf-arphic ttf-arphic-bkai00mp ttf-arphic-bsmi00lp ttf-arphic-gbsn00lp ttf-arphic-gkai00mp ttf-arphic-ukai ttf-caslon ttf-wqy-zenhei
Neither of the previous is a bitmap font, I guess.
Yes. In general, SUSE packages are mostly named as is of the original package name. These ttf-* are built from ttf-*.tar file. Same for gnu-unifont. It's built from gnu-unifont.tar. When you want to look over all fonts, this is a bad way. Meanwhile, if you know of a project and look for the package, it might match easier. But the current situation looks messy, indeed, so I'm for some consistent naming rule.
And, adding -fonts to a package like gun-unifont would be strange. gnu-unifont-fonts? In most cases, prefixing would be better IMO.
Fedora uses this name: gnu-free-fonts (if this package contains the same fonts).
No, it's a different one. I guess it's "freefont" package.
Well, apart from the previous details, I see the following questions:
- Do we really want to rename fonts? If yes, maybe we could use the "Provides" keyword in the spec file to hold the old name?
Right, if we do any renaming, we must give provides/obsoletes inevitably.
- Should we use the Fedora or Ubuntu way?
It's a good option.
- Is it anywhere documented?
- Probably it is useful to open a FATE request?
Sounds like a good idea.
So, we need to make clear:
- whether we group all fonts or only specific types (ttf, bitmap, etc); if we name for ttf, what we should do for otf?
It seems neither Fedora nor Ubuntu distinguish OTF and TTF, so why should we? It make sense for bitmap vs. vector.
It's my guess, too. But a picky person would complain ;)
- whether to give a prefix or a suffix
I don't have any preferences, either way is as long it is consistent. :-)
Me, too. I *guess* prefixing would work easier, though. We'd need just to try some and judge later.
Another issue: Do we have a special repository dedicated only to fonts? I couldn't find any... Do you think this is useful?
Until now, fonts packages are put in M17N project in general. Moving around would be OK, but we need the proper notification.
Ok. I just looked from the usability perspective when someone wants to incorporate a repository with fonts. Where should he get it from? What's the URL? etc.
OBS M17N repo :)
It was just an idea, if there technical issues than I'm totally fine with the M17N repo. :)
I find it's OK to move fonts out of M17N into an individual project. Fonts are rarely rebuilt and all noarch, thus they don't need to keep up each openSUSE release. But, as mentioned, they are already found in M17N. So, when we move them, we need to notify users to add the new project (or make links to M17N back), otherwise they'll loose the packages. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Takashi, On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:29:31 +0100 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[...]
Yes, that would be another possibility. However, I doubt this option would be taken into account very often. ;)
Heh. The RPM group has nowadays less meaning, but it could be improved a bit more, in general.
Yes, you're probably right, but I hardly use it.
[...]
I would appreciate it if we could make it more consistent, but I know there might be some technical issues (dependency problems, ...) that prevents from doing so.
I guess the dependency shouldn't be a big issue when we do renaming correctly.
Ok, that's good news!
[...]
Neither of the previous is a bitmap font, I guess.
Yes. In general, SUSE packages are mostly named as is of the original package name. These ttf-* are built from ttf-*.tar file. Same for gnu-unifont. It's built from gnu-unifont.tar.
Ok.
[...] But the current situation looks messy, indeed, so I'm for some consistent naming rule.
That would be helpful
And, adding -fonts to a package like gun-unifont would be strange. gnu-unifont-fonts? In most cases, prefixing would be better IMO.
Fedora uses this name: gnu-free-fonts (if this package contains the same fonts).
No, it's a different one. I guess it's "freefont" package.
Ok, thanks for the hint.
[...]
- Probably it is useful to open a FATE request?
Sounds like a good idea.
Ok, here is the first draft: [313035] Invent Consistent Font Naming Schema https://features.opensuse.org/313035 I took the liberty to add you as interested. Feel free to change it.
So, we need to make clear:
- whether we group all fonts or only specific types (ttf, bitmap, etc); if we name for ttf, what we should do for otf?
It seems neither Fedora nor Ubuntu distinguish OTF and TTF, so why should we? It make sense for bitmap vs. vector.
It's my guess, too. But a picky person would complain ;)
Maybe. :)
Another issue: Do we have a special repository dedicated only to fonts? I couldn't find any... Do you think this is useful?
Until now, fonts packages are put in M17N project in general. Moving around would be OK, but we need the proper notification.
Ok. I just looked from the usability perspective when someone wants to incorporate a repository with fonts. Where should he get it from? What's the URL? etc.
OBS M17N repo :)
Well, *I* would first look for something like "fonts". M17N doesn't have "fonts" in its name. ;-)
It was just an idea, if there technical issues than I'm totally fine with the M17N repo. :)
I find it's OK to move fonts out of M17N into an individual project. Fonts are rarely rebuilt and all noarch, thus they don't need to keep up each openSUSE release.
Right. If you don't mind, I would request such a font repository.
But, as mentioned, they are already found in M17N. So, when we move them, we need to notify users to add the new project (or make links to M17N back), otherwise they'll loose the packages.
Ok, good point. -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com | HRB 21284 SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Thomas Schraitle <toms@suse.de> wrote:
Hi Takashi,
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:29:31 +0100 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[...]
Yes, that would be another possibility. However, I doubt this option would be taken into account very often. ;)
Heh. The RPM group has nowadays less meaning, but it could be improved a bit more, in general.
Yes, you're probably right, but I hardly use it.
I believe rpmgroup is soon to be deprecated for opensuse. Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 10:09:50 -0500 Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Heh. The RPM group has nowadays less meaning, but it could be improved a bit more, in general.
Yes, you're probably right, but I hardly use it.
I believe rpmgroup is soon to be deprecated for opensuse.
Another reason to make font names consistent and logical. ;) -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Tel: +49-(0)911-740 53 131 Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com | HRB 21284 SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 30.11.2011 16:15, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 10:09:50 -0500 Greg Freemyer<greg.freemyer@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Heh. The RPM group has nowadays less meaning, but it could be improved a bit more, in general. Yes, you're probably right, but I hardly use it.
I believe rpmgroup is soon to be deprecated for opensuse. Another reason to make font names consistent and logical. ;)
I added your request to openFATE. Please review https://features.opensuse.org/313037 and add your comments :-) kind regards, --kdl PS: Do you know that your signature-penguin is damaged on lists.suse.de and lists.o.o? -- -o) Kim Leyendecker, openSUSE Community Member /\ GPG Key: 664265369547B825 | leyendecker@opensuse.org __v http://www.opensuse.org - Linux for open minds -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Kim, On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:45:59 +0100 Kim Leyendecker <leyendecker@opensuse.org> wrote:
[...]
I added your request to openFATE. Please review https://features.opensuse.org/313037 and add your comments :-)
Thanks Kim, but I did that already. You missed my previous message. :) See my request: https://features.opensuse.org/313035
PS: Do you know that your signature-penguin is damaged on lists.suse.de and lists.o.o?
Oh, really? Are you sure you use a monospace font? ;) -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com | HRB 21284 SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Am 30.11.2011 17:45, schrieb Kim Leyendecker:
PS: Do you know that your signature-penguin is damaged on lists.suse.de and lists.o.o?
No, it's not. -- Stefan Seyfried "Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body!" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
* Stefan Seyfried <stefan.seyfried@googlemail.com> [2011-11-30 21:17]:
Am 30.11.2011 17:45, schrieb Kim Leyendecker:
PS: Do you know that your signature-penguin is damaged on lists.suse.de and lists.o.o?
No, it's not.
Maybe he means in the web archive [1]. Regards, Bernhard [1] http://lists.suse.de/opensuse-packaging/2011-11/msg00136.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 30.11.2011 21:41, Bernhard Walle wrote:
- Stefan Seyfried<stefan.seyfried@googlemail.com> [2011-11-30 21:17]:
Am 30.11.2011 17:45, schrieb Kim Leyendecker:
PS: Do you know that your signature-penguin is damaged on lists.suse.de and lists.o.o? No, it's not. Maybe he means in the web archive [1].
Regards, Bernhard
[1] http://lists.suse.de/opensuse-packaging/2011-11/msg00136.html
yeah! I meant that one.... --kdl -- -o) Kim Leyendecker, openSUSE Community Member /\ GPG Key: 664265369547B825 | leyendecker@opensuse.org __v http://www.opensuse.org - Linux for open minds -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 11/30/2011 03:59 PM, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
Ok, here is the first draft:
[313035] Invent Consistent Font Naming Schema https://features.opensuse.org/313035
I took the liberty to add you as interested. Feel free to change it.
Please, pretty please adopt Fedora Fonts Policy[1] so we don't reinvent the wheel! Thanks! (Adopting Ubuntu scheme makes less sense, because we cannot share packages anyway and ttf- prefix seems broken as not all fonts are ttf). [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol RUSNAK SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Boosters Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xA6917144 19000 Praha 9 prusnak[at]opensuse.org Czech Republic -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 13:49:00 +0100 Pavol Rusnak <prusnak@opensuse.org> wrote:
[...]
[313035] Invent Consistent Font Naming Schema https://features.opensuse.org/313035
Please, pretty please adopt Fedora Fonts Policy[1] so we don't reinvent the wheel! Thanks!
I just raised that idea, because I was a bit annoyed by this mess. ;) Others have to decide if they want to take this path.
(Adopting Ubuntu scheme makes less sense, because we cannot share packages anyway and ttf- prefix seems broken as not all fonts are ttf).
Yes, after some thought, it seems Fedora naming schema is a bit better.
Thanks for the pointer, Pavol! I've integrated your URL into the above FATE entry. Just for the records, basically it is this naming schema: [foundryname-]projectname[-fontfamilyname]-fonts all in lowercase. This could lead to some weird package names were the projectname already contains the word "font". I think, nevertheless it's better than the existing mess. -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com | HRB 21284 SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 12/01/2011 04:49 AM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
On 11/30/2011 03:59 PM, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
Ok, here is the first draft:
[313035] Invent Consistent Font Naming Schema https://features.opensuse.org/313035
I took the liberty to add you as interested. Feel free to change it.
Please, pretty please adopt Fedora Fonts Policy[1] so we don't reinvent the wheel! Thanks! (Adopting Ubuntu scheme makes less sense, because we cannot share packages anyway and ttf- prefix seems broken as not all fonts are ttf).
+1 Really, let's not re-invent the wheel. Cheers, Peter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 2011-11-30 15:05:11 (+0100), Thomas Schraitle <toms@suse.de> wrote: [...]
At Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:55:14 +0100, [...] [...] I would appreciate it if we could make it more consistent, but I know there might be some technical issues (dependency problems, ...) that prevents from doing so.
We should, definitely. [...]
And, adding -fonts to a package like gun-unifont would be strange. gnu-unifont-fonts? In most cases, prefixing would be better IMO.
Fedora uses this name: gnu-free-fonts (if this package contains the same fonts).
Well, apart from the previous details, I see the following questions:
- Do we really want to rename fonts? If yes, maybe we could use the "Provides" keyword in the spec file to hold the old name?
Yes, I believe we should. And indeed, there is a well definied procedure for renaming a package (Provides+Obsoletes).
- Should we use the Fedora or Ubuntu way?
+1 for Fedora way One option would be to also add a Provides with the Ubuntu name: Name: roboto-fonts Provides: ttf-roboto
- Is it anywhere documented?
It isn't, it must be added to the Packaging Guidelines for openSUSE when it's decided.
- Probably it is useful to open a FATE request?
Sure, why not.
So, we need to make clear:
- whether we group all fonts or only specific types (ttf, bitmap, etc); if we name for ttf, what we should do for otf?
It seems neither Fedora nor Ubuntu distinguish OTF and TTF, so why should we? It make sense for bitmap vs. vector.
Nah, I'd go for just -fonts, without the distinction.
- whether to give a prefix or a suffix
I don't have any preferences, either way is as long it is consistent. :-)
Indeed. I have been using the "-font" suffix up to now. I think we'd be better off using the same scheme as Fedora. Why invent yet another wheel? :)
Another issue: Do we have a special repository dedicated only to fonts? I couldn't find any... Do you think this is useful?
Until now, fonts packages are put in M17N project in general. Moving around would be OK, but we need the proper notification.
Ok. I just looked from the usability perspective when someone wants to incorporate a repository with fonts. Where should he get it from? What's the URL? etc.
It was just an idea, if there technical issues than I'm totally fine with the M17N repo. :) [...]
+1 for a new top-level repo. cheers -- -o) Pascal Bleser /\ http://opensuse.org -- we haz green __v http://fosdem.org -- we haz conf
Hi, On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:54:07 +0100 Pascal Bleser <pascal.bleser@opensuse.org> wrote:
[...]
- Do we really want to rename fonts? If yes, maybe we could use the "Provides" keyword in the spec file to hold the old name?
Yes, I believe we should. And indeed, there is a well definied procedure for renaming a package (Provides+Obsoletes).
Ok, documented in FATE#313035.
One option would be to also add a Provides with the Ubuntu name:
Name: roboto-fonts Provides: ttf-roboto
That's a good idea! I hope it doesn't introduce any problems. Anyway, I've added this to the ideas section in the above FATE entry so it don't get lost.
- Is it anywhere documented?
It isn't, it must be added to the Packaging Guidelines for openSUSE when it's decided.
Fair enough. :)
- Probably it is useful to open a FATE request?
Sure, why not.
I've created already one, use FATE#313035 for your comments, please.
It was just an idea, if there technical issues than I'm totally fine with the M17N repo. :) [...]
+1 for a new top-level repo.
Ok, "fonts" or "Fonts"? ;-) -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com | HRB 21284 SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:54:07 +0100 Pascal Bleser wrote:
One option would be to also add a Provides with the Ubuntu name:
Name: roboto-fonts Provides: ttf-roboto
What about OTF fonts? -- WBR Kyrill -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi,
On 2011-11-30 15:05:11 (+0100), Thomas Schraitle <toms@suse.de> wrote: [...]
+1 for a new top-level repo.
Requested new top level directory with the name "Fonts". See bnc#734550. -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany __v http://www.suse.com http://lizards.opensuse.org/author/thomas-schraitle/ SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 02:19:53PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:55:14 +0100, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
over the years, I've collected a bunch of great fonts in my home repository. However, it seems we don't have a consistent naming schema for fonts. Although the Packaging Guidelines[1] links to the old Wiki[2], the information therein is printed in red and I'm not sure how useful is this nowadays.
This has some interesting effects. If you search for fonts like this:
# zypper se font
you will get _some_ but not all. For example, the popular Linux Libertine and DejaVu fonts are not listed. A user has to _know_ the name. IMHO this is not very intuitive and userfriendly.
True. (Though, this reminds me whether any possibility to search for RPM group...)
Btw, rpm automatically adds some font() provides *if* the fonconfig package was installed when the package was built. This seems to be true of only a couple of our font packages, though. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
participants (11)
-
Bernhard Walle -
Greg Freemyer -
Kim Leyendecker -
Kyrill Detinov -
Michael Schroeder -
Pascal Bleser -
Pavol Rusnak -
Peter Linnell -
Stefan Seyfried -
Takashi Iwai -
Thomas Schraitle