https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307238 --- Comment #21 from Alexander Ploumistos <alex.ploumistos@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #20) > Good call. I just checked, and gnome-software shows the font without trouble > (although with a big "no screenshot provided" empty box, but that's a > separate issue). >From the AppStream documentation: "If the font metadata does not define an own screenshot, the AppStream generator is supposed to render one or multiple sample images using the respective font." In my opinion, having maintainers provide their own screenshots for fonts without strict guidelines in place would hurt consistency. I can see its usefulness for something like hieroglyphics, but for anything else we should probably stick with the lazy dog and friends. > > Just out of curiosity though, how would such a metapackage complicate things? Wouldn't it work like the libreoffice metapackage which doesn't have to be installed in order to get some features of the suite? > > It wouldn't. It's just yet another package that needs an occasional release > and update, etc. For the record, I went with a gdouros-textfonts-doc subpackage, which every other font package in the family recommends. Btw, in "My Requests" section of pkgdb, this package and its master branch are still listed as approved and pending respectively. I set f22 & f23 to "Obsolete", but nothing changed. None of the other packages I've introduced is listed there, so I don't think it's the default behavior. Let's see what happens after the move to pagure. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
