Bug 1099033
| Summary: | Review Request: adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts - A set of serif OpenType fonts designed to complement Source Sans Pro | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Rick Elrod <relrod> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Parag AN(पराग) <panemade> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fonts-bugs, nomnex, package-review, panemade, relrod, suraia |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2016-08-30 17:08:10 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 201449 | ||
|
Description
Rick Elrod
2014-05-19 10:51:07 UTC
This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6862846 Can you add fonts appstream metainfo files? Please add it and update the package and I will review this. You can take the example for adding metainfo file from http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/adobe-source-sans-pro-fonts.git/plain/source-sans-pro.metainfo.xml there is no reply here. I am closing this review. I am interested in getting this font into Fedora. I have updated the package based on the updates for adobe-source-code-pro-fonts (bug 1246597) and adobe-source-sans-pro-fonts (bug 1246765). Spec URL: https://ikkoku.de/~suraia/adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts/adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts.spec SRPM URL: https://ikkoku.de/~suraia/adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts/adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts-1.017-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Source Serif Pro is a set of OpenType fonts to complement the Source Sans Pro family. Fedora Account System Username: suraia Are you still interested in reviewing the package? Please give some feedback so I can find another reviewer if necessary. Thanks! (In reply to Michael Kuhn from comment #4) > I am interested in getting this font into Fedora. I have updated the package > based on the updates for adobe-source-code-pro-fonts (bug 1246597) and > adobe-source-sans-pro-fonts (bug 1246765). > > Spec URL: > https://ikkoku.de/~suraia/adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts/adobe-source-serif- > pro-fonts.spec > SRPM URL: > https://ikkoku.de/~suraia/adobe-source-serif-pro-fonts/adobe-source-serif- > pro-fonts-1.017-1.fc23.src.rpm > > Description: > Source Serif Pro is a set of OpenType fonts to complement the Source Sans > Pro family. > > Fedora Account System Username: suraia You should open a new bugzilla. This bugzilla was already closed. If you were the original submitter then you could have opened it back but you are a fresh package submitter. (In reply to Michael Kuhn from comment #5) > Are you still interested in reviewing the package? Please give some feedback > so I can find another reviewer if necessary. Thanks! Sorry I don't understand, Had we talked before and I promised for this package review to you? I forgot to add FE-DEADREVIEW on this bug last time. Correcting it now. See its meaning at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Special_blocker_tickets > You should open a new bugzilla. This bugzilla was already closed. If you > were the original submitter then you could have opened it back but you are a > fresh package submitter. Sorry about that. I guess I did not read the policy in enough detail. > Sorry I don't understand, Had we talked before and I promised for this package review to you? No, we have not, sorry if I came across harshly. I just assumed you might still be interested in still reviewing the package. Anyway, I will open a new review request, thanks for the fast feedback! *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1371635 *** |