----- Mail original ----- De: "Parag N(पराग़)" Hi, On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Rajeesh K Nambiar <rajeeshknambiar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to maintain/co-maintain PT Serif[1] and PT Mono[2] fonts by > paratype. Would it be better to include them in the existing PT > Sans[3] fonts package - incorporate in the same spec as multiple > packages, or as individual specs? > > Here's the altered spec file[4] and srpm[5] combining all 3 paratype > fonts. (Note the hack in %prep phase due to source packages containing > same file names). What do you think? > |We can solve this by either one of following solution |1) Rename this package paratype-pt-sans-fonts to paratype-pt-fonts and |include all 3 types sans, serif, mono in subpackages. | OR |2) Add individual packages, add new package paratype-pt-serif-fonts |and paratype-pt-mono-fonts. | |Send an email to paratype-pt-sans-fonts package owner and get his |advice on this update issue. I don't have any strong opinion as long as different families (sans, serif, monospace, etc) end up in different binary packages (wish the app install people could read the specs they were pointed to and understand what a family means for fonts instead of inventing new non standard rules). However if the fonts are not published in the same archive by the foundry it's usually easier to maintain several simple source packages rather than a single mega src.rpm no one really understands. Beware that while PT fonts have a nice design and Paratype is pretty much the reference foundry for Russian cyrillic, it also took liberties with unicode last time I looked at it (not sure if everything has been moved to PUA or if they still export non-standard codepoints). Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot _______________________________________________ fonts mailing list fonts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
