El may 28, 2014 4:47 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <[email protected]> escribió: > > On Wed, 28 May 2014 16:19:16 -0500 > Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia <[email protected]> wrote: > > El may 28, 2014 1:31 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <[email protected]> > > escribió: > > > > > > On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200 > > > SanskritFritz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I don't really understand the difference between > > > > > community/ttf-droid and any of these: > > > > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid > > > > > > > > > > Any idea about duplicates in there? > > > > > > > > ttf-droid-sans > > > > Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 > > > > This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains > > > > more flavors. > > > > > > I'm a bit unsure if it's worth a standalone package. Unwanted files > > > can be ignored via NoExtract in pacman.conf… > > > > Not in this case. The packege in community should really be split into > > several different ones that reflect the style and width variants, > > namely normal vs codensed and sans vs serif. > > This way we should also split ttf-bitstream-vera, ttf-dejavu, > ttf-freefont, ttf-liberation and ttf-ubuntu-family. Why limit ourselves > to only normal, condensed and so on? Let's split bold and monoscape > variants too, because it can save 15MB of our incredibly small hard > drives. > > I'll wait a week with any further actions to see if fellow TUs > have different opinion.
I can do it, if you don't mind having someone give you a hand with the task. I'm not a TU, obviusly.
