Bug 1049076
Summary: | Review Request: google-android-emoji-fonts - Android Emoji font released by Google | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Peter Oliver <mavit> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Parag AN(पराग) <panemade> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | byount, fonts-bugs, mfabian, package-review, panemade, paul |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | panemade:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc19 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2014-01-14 16:47:56 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Peter Oliver
2014-01-06 23:30:08 UTC
As you are packaging a single font from an upstream git repo, in the absence of a versioned archive from upstream, I wonder whether it might be better to go with a package version that directly corresponds to the font version? That way, any updated versions that appear in other repos could be more clearly recognised. Both the head and name tables of this font say that this is version 1.01. 1) I will suggest to use following release tag Release Tag for Pre-Release Packages: 0.%{X}.%{alphatag} and version tag as 1.01 So, package name is google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228 2) It took a lot of time to clone the fonts git (approx. 495 MB data) but I see another easy way is to use URL https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base.git/+archive/jb-release/data/fonts.tar.gz and extract required files and create new source archive. 3) Remove following files from the source archive as they are not needed Android.mk fallback_fonts-ja.xml fallback_fonts.xml fonts.mk MODULE_LICENSE_APACHE2 NOTICE system_fonts.xml vendor_fonts.xml 4) As the getdroid.sh only fetches AndroidEmoji font, name it as getandroidemoji.sh 5) No need of clean section in spec file. Remove following from spec %clean rm -fr %{buildroot} Spec URL: http://mavit.fedorapeople.org/rpm/google-android-emoji-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://mavit.fedorapeople.org/rpm/google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-1.20120228git.fc21.src.rpm Having consulted https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages, I have changed the package name to google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-1.20120228git. The gitdroid.sh script was taken from the google-droid-fonts package. I have written a new script, get-source-from-git.sh, which fetches the files from https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base.git/+archive/jb-release/data/fonts.tar.gz and manipulates them into a source tarball. Are you sure NOTICE can be omitted? It contains the licence. I have removed the %clean section. 1) Please use the recommended way of naming release tags Pre-Release Packages: 0.%{X}.%{alphatag} 2) I take NOTICE is a duplication of README.txt file. README file clearly says License URL and fonts in that directory licensed under Apache 2 license whereas NOTICE just provides text of license file only. If you want you can package it as I don't see it as a blocker. Other than these, packaging looks Ok. fontconfig rule not needed as this is pictorial font. Group tag is not mandatory now so you can remove that also. Could you explain why that is the appropriate release tag? As I understand it, this is a "post-release package" rather than a "pre-release package", as described at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages, but I accept that my understanding may be wrong :-) I asked this release tag issue on packaging list and got reply to clarify with upstream about what they think. Here is that reply https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2014-January/009919.html Thanks. I'm convinced. Android don't do tarball releases, they just tag the release in git. What I hadn't considered before was that that's a release of Android as a whole, not a release of this font. So, if there's never been a release, this must be a prerelease. Spec URL: http://mavit.fedorapeople.org/rpm/google-android-emoji-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://mavit.fedorapeople.org/rpm/google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc21.src.rpm Looks good. APPROVED. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: google-android-emoji-fonts Short Description: Android Emoji font released by Google Owners: mavit Branches: f19 f20 InitialCC: fonts-sig Git done (by process-git-requests). Thanks, all! google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc19 google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc20 google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. google-android-emoji-fonts-1.01-0.1.20120228git.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. Is it possible to get this font (or the discussed upstream replacement) included in a default Desktop install of Fedora? (In reply to Bryan Yount from comment #18) > Is it possible to get this font (or the discussed upstream replacement) > included in a default Desktop install of Fedora? I've asked about this in https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2015-February/011582.html |