Bug 477333 - [brettfont-fonts] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Summary: [brettfont-fonts] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: brettfont-fonts
Version: 13
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Parag Nemade
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends On: 615848
Blocks: F11-new-font-rules
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2008-12-20 17:09 UTC by Nicolas Mailhot
Modified: 2010-07-22 05:37 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

(edit)
Clone Of:
(edit)
Last Closed: 2010-07-22 05:37:50 UTC


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Nicolas Mailhot 2008-12-20 17:09:41 UTC
After more than a month of consultation,
feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved
by FESCO.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2008-11-18)
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts

Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new templates.

The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can
serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package are not clear enough:

❄ 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
❄ stix-fonts
❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts

FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages, nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines.

A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before the F11 release.

Further information on fonts packaging changes will be published on fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com

Comment 1 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 15:19:06 UTC
To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ)

Comment 2 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 18:36:33 UTC
FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage:

– 2009-01-14: naming
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29

— 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29

(packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted)

Comment 3 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-02-18 19:31:47 UTC
This is a reminder for all the packagers that still have bugs open about adapting to font packaging guidelines there is only one month left before Fedora 11 beta:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/11/Schedule

A week of this month will see the Fedora 11 mass rebuild, that will load the build farm:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild

As already converted packages showed it is quite possible to make mistakes during the conversion. Please make releng and QA happy and don't wait till the last minute to do your changes (avoid pre-beta panic). If possible start before the mass rebuild so we don't burn cycles on incorrect packages.

The PackageKit enhancements stated for Fedora 11 assume fonts and font-using packages are sane (basically respect packaging guidelines). It is quite possible that not-converted packages will interact with the F11 font autoinstall feature in "interesting" ways.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AutomaticFontInstallation

We don't want that

There is extensive documentation on the wiki and most of your questions have likely already been answered there. Please do read the FAQ before making more work for the support team by asking questions answered there.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29

Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2009-06-09 10:20:31 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 11 development cycle.
Changing version to '11'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Comment 5 Jon Stanley 2009-11-19 15:21:20 UTC
Moving these to rawhide so bugzapper doesnt get em :)

Comment 6 Bug Zapper 2010-03-15 12:21:32 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 13 development cycle.
Changing version to '13'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Comment 7 Parag Nemade 2010-07-22 05:37:50 UTC
Fixed in oflb-brett-fonts-20080506-7.fc14


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