Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-features (48 mails)

< Previous Next >
[openFATE 313035] Invent Consistent Font Naming Schema/Central Font Repository
Feature changed by: Petr Gajdos (pgajdos)
Feature #313035, revision 35
Title: Invent Consistent Font Naming Schema/Central Font Repository

openSUSE Distribution: Unconfirmed
Priority
Requester: Desirable

Requested by: Kim Leyendecker (openlhag)
Requested by: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle)
Partner organization: openSUSE.org

Description:
Current State
Currently, our package names for fonts are suboptimal. Here are some
examples:
farsifonts
fonts-arabic
freefont
gnu-unifont
indic-fonts
intlfonts-ttf
xorg-x11-fonts

From a usability perspective, it would be better to make a consistent
naming schema for font packages. Naming schemas from other
distributions:
* Ubuntu: prefix with "ttf-"
* Fedora: suffix with "-fonts"
With the above inconcistency, popular fonts like LinuxLibertine or
dejavu cannot be found.
Please document any decisions in the Package Guidelines regarding how
to name our fonts correctly and consistently.
Renaming Rules
Some ideas from the opensuse-packaging mailinglist:
* New fonts are named according to the Fedora font naming schema:
[foundryname-]projectname[-fontfamilyname][-fonttype]-fonts
* Until there's a new version out, add this in your SPEC file:
# FIXME: This causes a rpmlint warning; change <= to < once here's a
new upstream version
Obsoletes: $oldname <= %{version}
Provides: $oldname = %{version}
* When there is a new version released, change the SPEC file:
Obsoletes: $oldname < %{version}
Provides: $oldname = %{version}

Relations:
- Request of a Fonts Repository (novell/bugzilla/id: 734550)
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734550
- openSUSE M17N:Fonts Repository (obs/project:
http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/M17N:/fonts/)
- openSUSE Fonts Policy (url:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Fonts)
- openSUSE Font List (old -> new) (url:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Fonts:Fontlist)
- Package Guidelines (url:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines)
- Fedora: Packaging:FontsPolicy (url:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy)
- Mail Thread on opensuse-packaging ML (url:
http://lists.suse.de/opensuse-packaging/2011-11/msg00126.html)
- Old Wiki Page for Font Package Layout (url:
http://old-en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Fonts_Policy#Package_layout_for_fonts)
- Ubuntu Font Package List (url:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?suite=natty&section=all&arch=any&searchon=names&keywords=ttf)
- Fedora Font Package List (url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/list/*-fonts*?_csrf_token=b2721571e462ba9a4dbb87068cad45089ec9dc43)

Business case (Partner benefit):
openSUSE.org: The benefits:
* Consistency: easier to find, easier to install
* Usability: better to memorize and therefor easier to find
* Migration: Users from other distributions find their fonts easier


Discussion:
#1: Michael Foerster (yamaban) (2011-12-01 00:22:29)
A suffix *-font(s) would be a good start. Yes, that would include ALL
fonts, but for the details (e.g: vector/woff/ttf/otf/t1/bitmap) there's
also the description field. (see "zypper se" or
http://software.opensuse.org/search) A prefix ttf- / otf- / t1- could
be added or not, even at a later date.
Maybe even gatter all fonts in a 'devel' repo, to give them a central
home?

#6: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle) (2011-12-03 12:47:51) (reply to
#1)
> Maybe even gatter all fonts in a 'devel' repo, to give them a central
home?
See Bug # 734550 (https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734550)

#2: Jan Engelhardt (jengelh) (2011-12-01 00:31:14)
>Currently, our package names for fonts are suboptimal. Well, the
package name usually follows the upstream project name. >Ubuntu: prefix
with "ttf-" Hah, something only Ubuntu could have come up with. As if
everything was ttf. >Fedora: suffix with "-fonts" unifont-fonts sounds
kinda weird and redundant.
I would argue that is precisely what RPM groups are for. Search in the
System/X11/Fonts category and voilĂ .

#3: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle) (2011-12-01 10:28:57) (reply to
#2)
> Well, the package name usually follows the upstream project name. [...]
> Fedora: suffix with "-fonts" unifont-fonts sounds kinda weird and
redundant.
This is probably the case and leads to this "weird" package name.
However, you will find *always* examples were it looks strange. That's
the price we need to pay if we want to be consistent. It is at least
better than the existing mess.

#4: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle) (2011-12-01 14:00:52)
According to Fedora packaging, they use the naming schema
[foundryname-]projectname[-fontfamilyname]-fonts

in lowercase.

#5: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle) (2011-12-02 17:52:03)
Requested new top level directory with the name "Fonts". See
bnc#734550.

#7: Vincent Untz (vuntz) (2011-12-05 09:31:55)
This should be easy to fix for 12.2, so let's just do it :-)

#8: Tim Edwards (tk83) (2011-12-05 11:44:42)
+1 for the -fonts suffix. There's no easy way to search in RPM package
groups anyway - most people search by name whether using Apper, YAST
Package Management or zypper so -fonts is perfect.

#9: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle) (2011-12-06 13:16:31)
Status update: Darix created M17N:fonts repository for us, Bug # 734550
(https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734550) is fixed.
I'll fill this repository with some content... Work in progress.

#14: Jan Engelhardt (jengelh) (2011-12-30 07:55:10) (reply to #9)
Don't forget to remove the packages from M17N then. Nothing is worse
than duplication.

#10: Takashi Iwai (tiwai) (2011-12-21 18:31:38)
A remaining question is how to distinguish packages, e.g. when one
provides a bitmap font and another a TTF font with the very same style.
An example is baekmum fonts. Currently, baekmum includes bitmap fonts
while baekmuk-ttf includes TTF.
Also, there are still non-TTF fonts, such as CID-keyed-fonts.
Currently, it's called like CID-keyed-fonts-Wada.
So, for such cases, we may need a type suffix in addition. Such as,
baekmum-bitmap-fonts and bakmum-ttf-fonts. Also, wada-cid-fonts (or
wada-cid-keyed-fonts, but I think the suffix is too long).
That is, the naming schema will be:
[foundryname-]projectname[-fontfamilyname][-fonttype]-fonts
where fonttype is either bitmap, ttf, cid, or whatever.

#11: Thomas Schraitle (thomas-schraitle) (2011-12-22 09:17:44) (reply
to #10)
That's a good point, Takashi! Funnily, I've looked at this font some
days ago, but I've skipped it and renamed the unambiguous packages
first. :-)
At the moment, there are over 20 fonts in the M17N:fonts repo
available. Most of them could be easily renamed to "Fedora-style"
names. Some devel projects has been changed too. More will come in the
future. My plan is to rename them write a mail to the packaging
mailinglist next year.
I'll take into account your idea.

#12: Takashi Iwai (tiwai) (2011-12-22 12:12:24) (reply to #11)
I worked on some Japanese fonts yesterday on M17N:fonts repo, then
stumbled upon these problems.
Some uncovered ares is X11 fonts. So far, we have xorg-x11-fonts, xorg-
x11-fonts-core. These are from X repo, and contain both bitmap and
scalable fonts in a single package. So, no -bitmap suffix is needed
unless split.
In addition, there are bitmap fonts in M17N: 844-ksc-pcf, baekmuk, dina-
fonts, efont-unicode, gnu-unifont, ifnt* (from intlfnts), wqy-
bitmapfont, xfntjp and xfntkr (maybe something is missing). These can
be well named as *-bitmap-fonts. Especially the one like gnu-unifont
can be gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts, which is better than gnu-unifont-fonts
:)
So, xfntjp will be x11-japanese-bitmap-fonts, and ifntjapa will be
intlfonts-japanese-a-bitmap-fonts.

#13: Takashi Iwai (tiwai) (2011-12-22 16:47:24) (reply to #10)
CID-keyed fonts seem only for ghostscript. So we can exclude these from
the list.

+ #15: Petr Gajdos (pgajdos) (2012-05-17 09:59:13)
+ I think we are almost done. M17N should be fonts-free. Almost all
+ packages from M17N:fonts are also devel for openSUSE:Factory or
+ openSUSE:Factory:NonFree. There are few exceptions:
+ * dina-bitmap-fonts and proggy-fonts: talked to maintainer, he is fine
+ to have it only in M17N:fonts
+ * google-amaranth-fonts and google-mavenpro-fonts: new font packages
+ which appeared in M17N:fonts recently and missed round of submitting
+ google-* fonts; they will be submitted by their creator I guess
+ * ipa-bolditalic fonts to be submitted soon I guess
+ * mph-2b-damase-fonts was in M17N and not in factory; license isn't
+ clear to me, so M17N:fonts only for now
+ * x11-korean-bitmap-fonts (formerly xfntjp) have licensing issue, I
+ haven't found any statement that they are really "public domain" Bug #
+ 751717 (https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751717) (you will
+ probably not able to read it)
+ * intlfonts have also license issue Bug # 754741
+ (https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754741) (I am not
+ authorized to read this bug)
+ We have now 107 font packages in M17N:fonts :-).




--
openSUSE Feature:
https://features.opensuse.org/313035

< Previous Next >
This Thread