Le mercredi 07 novembre 2007 à 11:46 +0100, Frederic Crozat a écrit : > Le mardi 06 novembre 2007 à 10:57 -0800, Keith Packard a écrit : > > On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 15:06 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: > > > Le lundi 05 novembre 2007 à 16:22 -0800, Keith Packard a écrit : > > > > The second release candidate for fontconfig 2.5 is released, thanks much > > > > to Behdad for fixing a bunch of bugs and providing numerous Fedora > > > > patches to improve the default configuration. > > > > > > Before I forget (I wanted to push that for a long time and never find > > > enough time to do so), and since Bedhad started to push Fedora patches, > > > I'd like to push some configuration patches we have in Mandriva. > > > > Thanks! > > > > <alias> > > <family>sans-serif</family> > > <prefer> > > + <family>BPG Glaho International</family> <!-- lat,cyr,arab,geor --> > > <family>Bitstream Vera Sans</family> > > > > Are you really meaning to replace Vera Sans as the default sans-serif face here? > > I must confess this was added a long time ago (before DejaVu / Vera) by > our i18n specialist and I didn't touched it since. > > I think it can be be at the end of the list. > > I have another related question : we have some additional changes in our > Mandriva patch (that I didn't include it this patch) on the font > ordering and I was wondering if it was relevant for upstream : > > for serif and sans-serif, we are favoring DejaVu over Bitstream Vera > (since Vera is not changing anymore, unlike DejaVu which is also > changing for latin glyphs). Should we do the same upstream ? > > Related question : we are favoring free fonts (also because we aren't > enabling patented bytecode interpreter) over MS fonts, by pushing Luxi > and Nimbus over Verdana and Arial (or Andale Mono, Courier New). Do you > think it is a good idea and still needed, with Liberation fonts around > now ? > > > > It is adding more fonts to 60-latin.conf, 65-non-latin.conf and > > > 69-unifont.conf. Bedhad might want to look at 65-non-latin.conf, we are > > > adding one or two Persian fonts, which might be better in > > > 65-fonts-persian.conf but I prefer to have him doing the move between > > > files. Moreover, it is adding some informations about locales impacted > > > by fonts. > > > > documentation is always helpful, thanks for the changes. > > > > I didn't appear to receive the file in UTF-8 encoding, so I'm not sure > > about some of the non-Latin names. Can you check your mailer and see > > about ensuring that the attachment isn't getting scrambled? > > Strange, it looks UTF-8 to me, I've checked the mail received on the > mailing list. Moreover, we are both using evolution 2.12.0. > > I've attached a new version of the patch, done with git this time. Hmm, it seems my new patch missed 2.5.0. Is there problem about it ? I can split it into non controversial parts and parts which must be discussed. -- Frédéric Crozat <fcrozat@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Mandriva _______________________________________________ Fontconfig mailing list Fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
