Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 361441
Review Request: stix fonts - scientific and engineering fonts
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:12:20 EST
Spec URL: http://nim.fedorapeople.org/stix-fonts.spec
SRPM URL: http://nim.fedorapeople.org/stix-fonts-0.9-2.fc9.src.rpm
The mission of the Scientific and Technical Information Exchange (STIX) font
creation project is the preparation of a comprehensive set of fonts that serve
the scientific and engineering community in the process from manuscript
creation through final publication, both in electronic and print formats.
License needs approval by legal, but looks legit
This is a major font project that took years to complete (timeline starts in 1995) and has just been released.
Upstream beta period when fixes can be identified ends on december 15, so Fedora diffusion is needed quickly so our users can report problems while there is time
(the subpackage summaries were not changed after cut & pasting)
stix-fonts.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
stix-fonts.noarch: W: invalid-license STIX License
stix-fonts.src: W: invalid-license STIX License
stix-fonts-integrals.noarch: W: no-documentation
stix-fonts-integrals.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
stix-fonts-integrals.noarch: W: invalid-license STIX License
stix-fonts-pua.noarch: W: no-documentation
stix-fonts-pua.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
stix-fonts-pua.noarch: W: invalid-license STIX License
stix-fonts-sizes.noarch: W: no-documentation
stix-fonts-sizes.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
stix-fonts-sizes.noarch: W: invalid-license STIX License
stix-fonts-variants.noarch: W: no-documentation
stix-fonts-variants.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
stix-fonts-variants.noarch: W: invalid-license STIX License
So fix the version and those should be fine.
"additional" is misspelled a few times.
fontconfig should be used to backfill the glyphs from higher codepoints to lower
(not a blocker).
> stix-fonts-integrals.noarch: W: invalid-license STIX License
> stix-fonts-variants.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
→ bogus warning, our guidelines authorize putting version inside the changelog
entry freetext (3rd format in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs), so rpmlint is wrong
> "additional" is misspelled a few times.
> fontconfig should be used to backfill the glyphs from higher codepoints to
lower (not a blocker).
will do fontconfig magic whenever I can corner someone who knows the exact
fontconfig syntax to use
Ok, new version fixing additional, and using the short license ID spot just
added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/Fonts/Good
Should be good now I think
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: stix-fonts
Short Description: STIX scientific and engineering fonts
Owners: nim (FAS)
Branches: F-8 devel
Cvsextras Commits: yes
All set and pushed to F8 updates and devel
No F-7 builds?
I suppose I could do F-7 when the dust settles a bit, but it's not my priority
I'm a bit swamped in Fonts SIG work right now
Please do, we're on a F-7 deployment @ work, and would love to start
using/testing these asap.
Understood, but it requires checking if F-7 fontconfig understands the same
syntax as f-8 fontconfig, so it's not that simple
Ok, it seems F7 and F8 fontconfig are compatible, which makes demand for an F7
Package Change Request
Package Name: stix-fonts
New Branches: F-7
Added and build in F-7. Do complain if it does not reach a repo rear you.
Also, send remarks to
before the end of the beta period (dec 15)