Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-11 Thread Michal Nowak
On 15:29 Thu 10 Jul , Felix Miata wrote:
 I saw what he wrote before I wrote. I don't understand his response either.
 What is matter of comps?

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CompsXml#Fonts

It originaly should mean that we have to deal in good way with comps.xml
to be sure our font is placed in right category.

Open comps.xml, seeing is beliveing.

Michal

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Jens Petersen
Nicolas brought up the point recently in a font package review that we 
should standardize the naming of our fonts packages to improve 
consistency.  The proposal is to name all source packages in the form 
*-fonts.


If we agree on this then I think the Fonts Packaging guidelines should 
be updated to explicitly reflect this policy.


Here is a list of our source packages that do not currently end in -fonts:

These old fonts packages should be renamed I guess:
 fonts-ISO8859-2 - ISO8859-2-fonts?
 fonts-KOI8-R - KOI-R-fonts?

This should probably change:
 fonts-hebrew-fancy - fancy-fonts? (from culmus.sf.net)

 thaifonts-scalable (upstream name) - thai-scalable-fonts?

The following are already in the process of disappearing from rawhide:

 fonts-arabic - pending removal
 fonts-hebrew -recent devel dead.package
 fonts-japanese - renamed to japanese-bitmap-fonts today

A few others (*font*):
 efont-unicode-bdf - unicode-bdf-fonts?  (maybe better to replace with 
GNU Unifont?)

 freefont (maybe this too?)
 terminus-font - terminus-fonts?

3, TeX fonts
Probably TeX fonts are outside this discussion?:

 (tetex-fonts-hebrew, tex-fonts-hebrew, tetex-eurofont, 
tetex-font-cm-lgc, tetex-font-kerkis)


Did I miss any? :)

Jens

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Nicolas Mailhot

Le Jeu 10 juillet 2008 10:06, Jens Petersen a écrit :

Hi,

 Nicolas brought up the point recently in a font package review that we
 should standardize the naming of our fonts packages to improve
 consistency.  The proposal is to name all source packages in the form
 *-fonts.

Actually I didn't want to push the idea just before leaving for a long
vacation, but since it's on the table:

1. we've slowly been consolidating our font naming to foo-fonts packages

2. however we're still a long way from good consistency, such as the
one achieved Debian and Ubuntu-side

https://launchpad.net/~fonts/+packages

(note I think some of their choices are not too good, for example
using TTF when font formats change and indeed most modern fonts are
OTF)

3. consistency is good for users, it helps them find and discover
packages

4. consistency can not be achieved without deviating a little from
upstream naming, since upstreams are widly inconsistent in their
choices.

If I had to propose a convention today that would be

foundry-name-fonts (single package)
foundry-name-fonts-sub (subpackage)

Right now we're not far from it but just different enough to annoy users:

1. a few packages deviate from pure -fonts suffix
2. a lot of packages are inconsistent on the foundry bits (in
particular sil fonts are packaged in many different ways)

 If we agree on this then I think the Fonts Packaging guidelines should
 be updated to explicitly reflect this policy.

 Here is a list of our source packages that do not currently end in
 -fonts:

 These old fonts packages should be renamed I guess:
   fonts-ISO8859-2 - ISO8859-2-fonts?
   fonts-KOI8-R - KOI-R-fonts?

 This should probably change:
   fonts-hebrew-fancy - fancy-fonts? (from culmus.sf.net)

culmus-fonts-fancy (if it's a subpackage)
culmus-fancy-fonts (if it's a standalone package)

   thaifonts-scalable (upstream name) - thai-scalable-fonts?

thai-scalable-fonts :)

 The following are already in the process of disappearing from rawhide:

   fonts-arabic - pending removal
   fonts-hebrew -recent devel dead.package
   fonts-japanese - renamed to japanese-bitmap-fonts today

 A few others (*font*):
   efont-unicode-bdf - unicode-bdf-fonts?  (maybe better to replace
 with
 GNU Unifont?)

gnu-uni-fonts

   freefont (maybe this too?)

gnu-free-fonts

   terminus-font - terminus-fonts?

 3, TeX fonts
 Probably TeX fonts are outside this discussion?:

I don't do TeX. I's sure lova for a TeX expert would join the SIG and
contribute to dicussions.

   (tetex-fonts-hebrew, tex-fonts-hebrew, tetex-eurofont,
 tetex-font-cm-lgc, tetex-font-kerkis)

 Did I miss any? :)

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Felix Miata
On 2008/07/10 14:05 (GMT+0200) Nicolas Mailhot apparently typed:

 If I had to propose a convention today that would be

 foundry-name-fonts (single package)
 foundry-name-fonts-sub (subpackage)

Great way to annoy people who use GUI package managers. They generally when
attempting to search for possible fonts to install will get at least 20 times
as many packages not actually containing fonts as packages actually
containing fonts. Since the results are generally sorted alphabetically, the
packages actually containing fonts are scattered randomly among all the
non-fonts packages. How's a person supposed to figure out what packages that
contain fonts are available? And how many people actually care what foundry
produced them?

The right way, cross-distro- would be for all packages containing one or more
fonts start 'fonts-', and all packages not containing fonts not start with
'fonts-'. e.g.

fontconfig-
fonts-bitmap-
fonts-dejavu-
fonts-freefont-
fonts-ghostscript-
fonts-liberation-
fonts-urw-
fonts-xorg-100dpi-
xorg-x11-font-utils-
-- 
Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry.
Ephesians 4:26 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Nicolas Mailhot

Le Jeu 10 juillet 2008 16:46, Felix Miata a écrit :

 On 2008/07/10 14:05 (GMT+0200) Nicolas Mailhot apparently typed:

 If I had to propose a convention today that would be

 foundry-name-fonts (single package)
 foundry-name-fonts-sub (subpackage)

 Great way to annoy people who use GUI package managers. They generally
 when attempting to search for possible fonts to install will get at
 least 20 times
 as many packages not actually containing fonts as packages actually
 containing fonts.

Good GUI package managers use repodata groups, either directly or
indirectly (ie packagekit). Expecting a unified fonts- prefix is not
workable with subpackages, short of performing deep rpm vodoo that
makes the link to srpm un-obvious and confuses users in bugzilla.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Michal Nowak
On 10:46 Thu 10 Jul , Felix Miata wrote:
 Great way to annoy people who use GUI package managers. They generally when
 attempting to search for possible fonts to install will get at least 20 times
 as many packages not actually containing fonts as packages actually
 containing fonts. 
One could say such people should select some font category in their 
GUI pgk manager and then comfortably select right fonts.

Or issue:

  yum groupinfo Fonts

Just a matter of comps if the category includes non-font stuff.

Michal

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Nicolas Mailhot
Le jeudi 10 juillet 2008 à 17:31 +0200, Michal Nowak a écrit :

 Or issue:
 
   yum groupinfo Fonts
 
 Just a matter of comps if the category includes non-font stuff.

Unless I've made a mistake somewhere, our guidelines make very clear
both that fonts packages must be declared in comps and how to makez that
declaration.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message	numériquement signée
___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list


Re: fonts package naming guideline

2008-07-10 Thread Michal Nowak
On 14:15 Thu 10 Jul , Felix Miata wrote:
 As to the current state of the GUI package manager in F9, I have no idea what
 it looks like or can do, because starting KDE4 from KDM kills video or puts
 display to sleep in both KDE and all ttys ever since last updates on my Intel
 845G.
gpk-application

The first fist-time-user will do is to click on Font. In case it works
(s)he will get list of font.

 I don't understand your statement matter of comps.
Nicolas pointed it in this tread already.

Looks like a beginning of pointless flame, I am not going to go on in this
thread.

Michal

___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list