Spec URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/digna-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/digna-fonts-20031109-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Phranzysko's sister handwriting. Note: This package is required by zaz.
Adding fedora-fonts-bugs-list in CC so it registers on the Fonts SIG review list
Sorry for taking so long to review, I monitor fedora-fonts-bugs-list but only check for "wild" font package submissions when I have some free time. Anyway, review : 1. (comment) The font could probably be classified as cursive, but then the boundary between "fantasy handwriting" and "realistic handwriting" is a bit fuzzy See /usr/share/fontconfig/templates/fontconfig-generics.txt 2. (comment) The fontconfig templates have been tweaked a little in fontpackages-devel, though the old templates you used will still work fine 3. (blocking) Since the font family name is "Digna's Handwriting" the package should be named *dignas-handwriting-fonts 4. (blocking) Since this font is distributed via the Open Font LiBrary project, the package should be named oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts 5. (non-blocking) There is no usable licensing statement in the font file, and it is not distributed with a detached .txt licensing file, so the only licensing trace is the OFL logo on OFLB. Since a web site can vanish at any time it would be nice to ask upstream to distribute the font file with a detached .txt licensing file in a zip archive (even better if the licensing info is also added to the font metadata). If upstream does not want to joining the copy of a mail where they state the font is OFL to the package as %doc would be better than nothing. 6. (non-blocking) fontlint is not happy with this font, it has some problems upstream should look at (cf attached repo-font-audit report) 7. (non-blocking) repo-font-audit detected partial lang coverage in the font, it'd be nice if upstream completed the partial languages (though, at this date, it may be difficult) 8. (non-blocking) please add a page describing this font on the wiki so it is documented with other Fedora fonts: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#1 Since you're self-packaging the font, it does not need to be very exhautive, just to provide minimal info about the font Anyway this is a very clean package and apart from the naming issues there is little to complain of, it should not be too hard to get it to approvable state
Created attachment 377027 [details] repo-font-audit report for this package
(In reply to comment #2) > Sorry for taking so long to review, I monitor fedora-fonts-bugs-list but only > check for "wild" font package submissions when I have some free time. No problem. I'm not a font packager and I missed the suggestion to CC the fedora-fonts-bugs-list. > Anyway, review : > > 1. (comment) The font could probably be classified as cursive, but then the > boundary between "fantasy handwriting" and "realistic handwriting" is a bit > fuzzy > See /usr/share/fontconfig/templates/fontconfig-generics.txt I choose "fantasy" because I browsed Fedora CVS for other handwriting fonts and this is what I found: brettfont-fonts: There is no fontconfig.conf http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/brettfont-fonts/devel/ sj-fonts: "fantasy" http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/sj-fonts/devel/ dustin-domestic-manners-fonts: "fantasy" http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/dustin-domestic-manners-fonts/devel/ > 2. (comment) The fontconfig templates have been tweaked a little in > fontpackages-devel, though the old templates you used will still work fine > > 3. (blocking) Since the font family name is "Digna's Handwriting" the package > should be named *dignas-handwriting-fonts > > 4. (blocking) Since this font is distributed via the Open Font LiBrary project, > the package should be named oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts I renamed the package, but I found really a lot of fonts in Fedora CVS that do not comply with this guideline. For example the aforementioned brettfont, icelandic-fonts, asana-math-fonts, roadstencil-fonts, sportrop, etc that are also distributed via the Open Font Library project. > 5. (non-blocking) There is no usable licensing statement in the font file, and > it is not distributed with a detached .txt licensing file, so the only > licensing trace is the OFL logo on OFLB. Since a web site can vanish at any > time it would be nice to ask upstream to distribute the font file with a > detached .txt licensing file in a zip archive (even better if the licensing > info is also added to the font metadata). If upstream does not want to joining > the copy of a mail where they state the font is OFL to the package as %doc > would be better than nothing. > > 6. (non-blocking) fontlint is not happy with this font, it has some problems > upstream should look at (cf attached repo-font-audit report) > > 7. (non-blocking) repo-font-audit detected partial lang coverage in the font, > it'd be nice if upstream completed the partial languages (though, at this date, > it may be difficult) I'll mail upstream about this, but I'm not confident at all that your points will be addressed. Upstream seems to have made only this font in its lifetime and it did it a long ago. > 8. (non-blocking) please add a page describing this font on the wiki so it is > documented with other Fedora fonts: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#1 > Since you're self-packaging the font, it does not need to be very exhautive, > just to provide minimal info about the font https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/OFLB_Dignas_Handwriting_fonts Thanks for the review! http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts.spec http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts-20031109-2.fc12.src.rpm Changelog: - Changed package name to comply to Font Packaging Guidelines
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Sorry for taking so long to review, I monitor fedora-fonts-bugs-list but only > > check for "wild" font package submissions when I have some free time. > > No problem. I'm not a font packager and I missed the suggestion to CC the > fedora-fonts-bugs-list. > > > Anyway, review : > > > > 1. (comment) The font could probably be classified as cursive, but then the > > boundary between "fantasy handwriting" and "realistic handwriting" is a bit > > fuzzy > > See /usr/share/fontconfig/templates/fontconfig-generics.txt > > I choose "fantasy" because I browsed Fedora CVS for other handwriting fonts and > this is what I found: > > brettfont-fonts: There is no fontconfig.conf > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/brettfont-fonts/devel/ > > sj-fonts: "fantasy" > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/sj-fonts/devel/ > > dustin-domestic-manners-fonts: "fantasy" > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/dustin-domestic-manners-fonts/devel/ If you want to say "handwriting" the correct generic is "cursive" in fontconfig and in css. "fantasy" is just where we dump fonts we can not categorize otherwise. > > 4. (blocking) Since this font is distributed via the Open Font LiBrary project, > > the package should be named oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts > > I renamed the package, but I found really a lot of fonts in Fedora CVS that do > not comply with this guideline. For example the aforementioned brettfont, > icelandic-fonts, asana-math-fonts, roadstencil-fonts, sportrop, etc that are > also distributed via the Open Font Library project. If you knew how I wished their packagers fixed those to comply with our naming guidelines (grumbles)… This is all stuff that antedates the formal font package naming guideline that was adopted last year. New packages can't use old problems as excuse to introduce new ones. > http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts.spec > http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts-20031109-2.fc12.src.rpm Will check those ASAP
The blocking part of the review have been addressed, so this package is ⏆⏆⏆ APPROVED ⏆⏆⏆ You can now continue from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a (please continue fixing the non-blocking problems even after package creation, however) I hope the process was pleasant, and that it will inspire you to package other fonts for Fedora. Please do not hesitate to suggest improvements to our organisation on the fonts mailing list. Thank you for your contribution to our font package pool. ⇒ REASSIGNING
Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts Short Description: Handwriting font Owners: musuruan Branches: F-12 InitialCC: fonts-sig
Open Font Library email facility is not working. I have no other way to contact upstream :-(
You can try to ask for help on the openfontlibrary mailing list (I know the situation sort of sucks right now)
(In reply to comment #9) > You can try to ask for help on the openfontlibrary mailing list (I know the > situation sort of sucks right now) Nicolas, I saw you are already subscribed to that mailing list. Can you please write for me? I do not want to subscribe to another mailing list just for one post. Thanks! This is the error I get: "/var/www/openfontlibrary.org/htdocs/cclib/cc-debug.php"(287): error_log(../cchost_offline/cc-log.txt) [function.error-log]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory [2009-12-14 10:16 am][127.0.0.1][/media/people/contact/phranzysko]
Andrea, I am present in a lot of places but I have only so much free time in the day. Right now I'm way behind on the maintenance on my own packages, so I don't really have the time to relay other packager requests (and then track answers...)
cvs done.
oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts-20031109-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts-20031109-2.fc12
oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts-20031109-2.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Built and published. Closing.