Bugzilla (bugzilla.redhat.com) will be under maintenance for infrastructure upgrades and will not be available on July 31st between 12:30 AM - 05:30 AM UTC. We appreciate your understanding and patience. You can follow status.redhat.com for details.
Bug 462711 - Review Request: Mothanna-fonts - Mothanna-fonts from Arabeyes.org
Summary: Review Request: Mothanna-fonts - Mothanna-fonts from Arabeyes.org
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nicolas Mailhot
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On: 461139
Blocks: FedoraOLPCDelta
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2008-09-18 14:22 UTC by Subhodip Biswas
Modified: 2009-06-02 05:27 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2009-06-02 05:27:32 UTC
Type: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Subhodip Biswas 2008-09-18 14:22:05 UTC
Spec URL: http://subhodip.fedorapeople.org/Mothanna-fonts.spec
SRPM URL: http://subhodip.fedorapeople.org/Mothanna-fonts-0.02-3.fc9.src.rpm
Description: This package contains core Arabic fonts from Arabeyes.org project.
It covers Arabic, Farsi, Urdu and Pashto languages, and is suitable for
on screen display.

Koji build : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=831917

Comment 1 Jens Petersen 2008-10-03 06:26:40 UTC
Made this depend on Thabit-fonts review (bug 461139) since the packaging is very similar: so I suggest best to finish that review first to avoid duplicate review work.

Comment 2 Nicolas Mailhot 2008-10-26 12:29:28 UTC
Needinfo till a package that conforms to the points listed in bug #461139 is made available

Comment 3 Nicolas Mailhot 2008-11-17 09:53:00 UTC

Comment 4 Nicolas Mailhot 2008-12-21 21:43:53 UTC
[This is a simplified version of the message sent to every package maintainer that ships TTF/OTF/Type1 fonts in Fedora.]

Our font packaging guidelines have now changed. New font package submissions must now be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel
 – http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackageshttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_templatehttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts

It is preferred to create a font package or subpackage per font family, though
it is not currently a hard guidelines requirement.
has been submitted for FPC and FESCO approval today.

The new templates should make the creation of font packages easy and safe. 

The following packages have already been converted by their packager in fedora-devel and can serve as examples:
❄ abyssinica-fonts
❄ andika-fonts
❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts
❄ bitstream-vera-fonts
❄ charis-fonts
❄ dejavu-fonts
❄ ecolier-court-fonts
❄ edrip-fonts
❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts
❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts
❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts
❄ gfs-complutum-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-fonts
❄ gfs-eustace-fonts
❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts
❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts
❄ gfs-gazis-fonts
❄ gfs-jackson-fonts
❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts
❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts
❄ gfs-olga-fonts
❄ gfs-porson-fonts
❄ gfs-solomos-fonts
❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts
❄ nafees-web-naskh-fonts
❄ stix-fonts
❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts

The new spec templates have been designed to be easy to update to from the previous guidelines, and to remove complexity from font packages. To help new package creation the fontpackages-devel package has been made available in Fedora 9 and 10.

If you have any remaining questions about the new guidelines please ask them
fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com

Comment 5 Peter Robinson 2009-02-06 16:09:01 UTC
What is the status of this?

Comment 6 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-03-21 11:28:48 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> What is the status of this?  

The original submitter needs to take care of the review feedback, or someone else needs to submit a competing review request

Comment 7 Peter Robinson 2009-04-12 23:23:06 UTC
Hello Subhodip, What is the status of the updates required to this package for the review? It would be great to get this into Fedora 11.

Comment 8 Parag Nemade 2009-06-02 05:27:32 UTC
Its almost 7 months and no reply from submitter, I will close this review now. Anyone interested please submit new package review.
   If you are still following this review and want to package this, submit updated package.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.