https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #34 from Fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #33 from Peter Oliver ---
Thanks for your help, everyone.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
fonts-bugs mailing list -- fonts-bugs@lists.fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System ---
twitter-twemoji-fonts-2.4.0-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-86ff582bf9
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #31 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/twitter-twemoji-fonts. You may commit to the
branch "f27" in about 10 minutes.
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Bug 1514274 depends on bug 1527289, which changed state.
Bug 1527289 Summary: Review Request: nototools - Noto fonts support tools and
scripts plus web site generation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1527289
What|Remo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #30 from Neal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #29 from Peter Oliver ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #28)
> @Peter, can we drop the whole Noto Emoji source requirement from this font
> package now? It looks like the only file you use from it is a single tmpl
> file.
T
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #28 from Neal Gompa ---
@Peter, can we drop the whole Noto Emoji source requirement from this font
package now? It looks like the only file you use from it is a single tmpl file.
Can you instead submit a version of that to the Twe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #27 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #26)
>
> If I understand correctly, what you're telling me is that I need to include
> both URLs in a single comment, and that I have to label them "Spec URL" and
> "S
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #26 from Peter Oliver ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #25)
> But fedora-review will automatically use posts that have the following
> construction:
>
> Spec URL:
> https://pagure.io/twitter-twemoji-fonts/raw/master/f/twi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #25 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #24)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #23)
> > I need specifically links laid out specifically as they are in the
> > original post, so that fedora-review can pro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #24 from Peter Oliver ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #23)
> I need specifically links laid out specifically as they are in the
> original post, so that fedora-review can process it.
Are you sure that that’s the cause of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #23 from Neal Gompa ---
@Peter, I need specifically links laid out specifically as they are in the
original post, so that fedora-review can process it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Peter Oliver changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(ma...@mavit.org.u |
|k)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma...@mavit.org.uk
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #20 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #19)
> So, can I confirm the status of this review? Are we waiting for nototools
> to be split out into its own package? Is there anything else blocking
> review?
No
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #19 from Peter Oliver ---
So, can I confirm the status of this review? Are we waiting for nototools to
be split out into its own package? Is there anything else blocking review?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #18 from Peter Oliver ---
This builds fine with the unbundled nototools.
SRPM:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mavit/twitter-twemoji-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00689222-twitter-twemoji-fonts/twitter-twemoji-fonts-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1527289
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #17 from Peng Wu ---
It seems nototools can install scripts and data now.
I will check if we can build noto-emoji with installed nototools.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #16 from Peng Wu ---
I filed a package review request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1527289
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
__
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #15 from Jeremy Bicha ---
Should we open a separate bug to discuss nototools packaging?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
fonts-bugs mailin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #14 from Peter Oliver ---
(In reply to Peng Wu from comment #13)
> Okay, I am trying to package nototools separately.
I started to look at this myself. I saw that there's a copy of fontcrunch
bundled in third_party/fontcrunch, bu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #13 from Peng Wu ---
Okay, I am trying to package nototools separately.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
fonts-bugs mailing list -- fonts-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #12 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Peng Wu from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jeremy Bicha from comment #7)
> > Why don't you package nototools separately? You are using an embedded copy
> > of nototools to build google-noto-emoji-f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #11 from Peter Oliver ---
Thanks. I've updated the spec to use C.UTF-8, too.
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mavit/twitter-twemoji-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00663056-twitter-twemoji-fonts/twitter-twemo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #10 from Jeremy Bicha ---
(In reply to Peng Wu from comment #8)
> The problem is that nototools can't by installed when we package,
> the upstream didn't tell when the tools can be installed.
I don't think that's true. It works fi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #9 from Peng Wu ---
(In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #6)
> Peng Wu: Do you please happen to remember why the spec file for
> google-noto-emoji-fonts includes the following lines?
>
> > # Work around UTF-8
> > export LANG=zh_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #8 from Peng Wu ---
(In reply to Jeremy Bicha from comment #7)
> Why don't you package nototools separately? You are using an embedded copy
> of nototools to build google-noto-emoji-fonts and emojitwo-fonts (in COPR,
> not yet in F
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Jeremy Bicha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jbi...@ubuntu.com
--- Comment #7 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Peter Oliver changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p...@redhat.com
--- Comment #6 from Pe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #4)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #3)
> > General question: Why is Noto part of Twemoji? My understanding is that
> > these are different fonts altogether?
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #4 from Peter Oliver ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #3)
> General question: Why is Noto part of Twemoji? My understanding is that
> these are different fonts altogether?
See https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-emoji/issue
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #3 from Neal Gompa ---
General question: Why is Noto part of Twemoji? My understanding is that these
are different fonts altogether?
And what's exactly going on with the metadata mutation going on in the prep
stage?
> # Work aro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
--- Comment #2 from Peter Oliver ---
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mavit/twitter-twemoji-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00685492-twitter-twemoji-fonts/twitter-twemoji-fonts-2.3.1-4.fc28.src.rpm
--
You are receiving t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ngomp...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274
Peter Oliver changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproj
39 matches
Mail list logo