Hi, 2010/7/18 Parag N(पराग़) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx>: > Hi, > > 2010/7/18 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> Hi, >> >> On 07/18/2010 11:51 AM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Kevin Fenzi<kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:35:26 +0200 >>>> Sven Lankes<sven@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:09:37AM +0100, Paul Flo Williams wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I imagine that Nicholas raised this problem while doing his periodic >>>>>> fonts-incorrectly-packaged-in-non-font-package checks. The request >>>>>> to separate out the fonts from poker3d-data has been long since >>>>>> closed WONTFIX: >>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443 >>>>> >>>>> I just went through all bugs blocking F11-new-font-rules that have >>>>> been closed recently through the bugzapper EOL procedure and reopened >>>>> those which are clearly still valid. >>>>> >>>>> A rather large number of packages never had a single reply from one of >>>>> the maintainers. >>>> >>>> Sad. ;( >>>> >>>>> Do we have any provenpackages who volunteer to be CCed on bugs that >>>>> have patches attached? (Not that there currently are any such bugs >>>>> with patches but reopening I have found some low hanging fruits which >>>>> I'm planning to look at in the future). >>>> >>>> We should be careful here... if the packagers are really gone and no >>>> longer maintaining we should orphan the packages so people can take >>>> them over, not keep drive by maintaining them without being very >>>> involved. :) IMHO. >>>> >>> >>> I think those packages whose spec's need to be re-written should block >>> F14Target and volunteer's are welcome to post patches/fix them. >>> Recently I come across few packages which need to follow current fonts >>> packaging guidelines. I start working on those but found >>> openfontlibrary.org is almost broken and for those fonts it is >>> upstream. I am now searching those fonts if have some other publisher. >>> If i will find any other foundry then will use and import it in Fedora >>> otherwise my suggestion will be to retire those packages whose >>> upstream are gone now. >> >> Unless I read the thread wrong openfontlibrary.org will return. Also I see >> no reason to drop packages just because there upstream is gone. > Current fonts guidelines asks for using foundry name in font > package. If based on initial import where upstream URL is no longer > exists but its allowed to use that and use oflb as foundry name then I > am more willing to work on it. > Please tell me if this is ok. If you think its ok I will submit > new, to be renamed packages for package review. > If this is not ok then let those bugs be open forever..... > > >> Esp. for >> something like a font. If its a nice font and reasonably complete what sort >> of maintenance would you expect from upstream ? > Here problem is not maintainer required from upstream but should > foundry oflb is ok to use for a dead URL? > > I mean once Rembrand had >> finished the Night Watch, it was well finished. I don't see how a font is >> much different. >> > I don't understand this... > > Parag. >> Regards, >> >> Hans >> > To add above, See one more case https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=599786 Parag. _______________________________________________ fonts mailing list fonts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
