The maintainers of the packages I am about to mention are BCCed on this email. A couple of months ago, I talked about updating the fontawesome-fonts package to version 6.x. I want to give an update on where things stand. See https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jjames/FontAwesome6/ for builds of affected packages. All changes have been checked into my forks of the affected packages (username "jjames"). Here's a quick rundown of the changes. New packages: - fontawesome4-fonts (a near-identical copy of the current fontawesome-fonts package) - python-accessible-pygments (needed for new python-pydata-sphinx-theme version) Packages with significant changes, including version updates to get upstream changes to the use of FontAwesome fonts: - fontawesome-fonts (update to version 6.3.0) - cantata (update to version 2.5.0) - dogtag-pki - python-f5-sdk - python-nbclassic - python-networkx - python-pydata-sphinx-theme (update to version 0.13.0) - python-QtAwesome (update to version 1.2.2) - python-sphinx_ansible_theme (update to version 0.10.1) - python-XStatic-Font-Awesome (update to version 6.2.1.1) - R-fontawesome - sympa Packages where the only change is to replace this: Requires: fontawesome-fonts with this: Requires: font(fontawesome) - freeipa - ipsilon - python-acme - python-streamlink I did not build these packages in the COPR because the change is so trivial. This makes the dependency get version 4.x both before and after the other changes. Packages that do not need any changes because they already require font(fontawesome): - coq - libgpuarray - libsemigroups - python-BTrees - python-primecountpy - python-sphinx_rtd_theme In addition, texlive is changed by removing these lines from the texlive-fontawesome subpackage: # This is a bit of a lie, but I don't want someone who installs texlive-fontawesome to wonder where their # system fonts are. Requires: fontawesome-fonts I don't see any reason why we should spare people from learning the difference between system and TeX fonts. And anyway, there are lots of other such system/TeX font pairs, and this wasn't done for them. It wasn't even done for the texlive-fontawesome5 subpackage. What remains to be done ---------------------------------- The way the FontAwesome 6.x subpackages are split up seems to be suboptimal. First, nothing in Fedora wants just one of fontawesome-6-brands-font, fontawesome-6-free-fonts, and fontawesome-6-free-solid-fonts. Every user wants all 3. I only split them up this way because I thought the Font Packaging Guidelines indicated that must be done. (See below.) Now that I'm looking back through them again, I'm not sure that is true. I would like to merge these 3 into a single package if the guidelines permit doing so. Second, nothing in Fedora wants just one of fontawesome-fonts and fontawesome-fonts-web. Every user wants both. I split them up this way thinking the split would be helpful. Now I don't think it is, so I will probably throw away the fontawesome-fonts package and move its contents into fontawesome-fonts-web. Comments welcome. Should we run this through the Change process? At first I didn't think so, because I was dealing with a small number of packages. However, the more I have looked, the more cases of bundling I have discovered, so this is turning into a bigger deal. I'm starting to lean towards making this a Change. Opinions? Finally, very few of the packages mentioned above comply with the Font Packaging Guidelines, or at least my reading of them. I have not attempted to fix them, as that would blow this project up by at least an order of magnitude. The current guidelines (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/FontsPolicy/) are, I am sure, a big improvement over the previous iteration. However, in my opinion, they are not very accessible to people who are not font experts. They are long, complex, and (for me, at least) difficult to understand. It also doesn't appear that either packagers or reviewers are, in general, very familiar with them. We should do something to make them more widely understood, for some definition of "something". I will be away from my Fedora computer for the rest of this week, so I won't be able to actually do anything until next week. However, I should be able to read and respond to email on a mobile device with a depressingly small screen. It also tries to force me to top-post and send HTML email. Sorry about that in advance if it happens. Regards, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
