Alexander Ploumistos | 6 Jun 03:12 2015
Picon

New gdouros greek fonts

Hi everyone,

I have just submitted for review and created the wiki pages for
gdouros-anaktoria-fonts, gdouros-aroania-fonts and gdouros-asea-fonts.
As I have already mentioned, they are closely related to the
gdouros-alexander-fonts we already have in Fedora.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1228865
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Gdouros_Anaktoria_fonts

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1228868
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Gdouros_Aroania_fonts

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1228869
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Gdouros_Asea_fonts

And I just realized that I've forgotten to file the bug reports
against repo-font-audit, will do right away...
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
Alexander Ploumistos | 29 May 02:24 2015
Picon

Issues with repo-font-audit

Hello everyone,

I am the new maintainer of the gdouros-* fonts [1]. When I took over
the fonts, I was not aware of repo-font-audit (shame on me) and it was
the only check I hadn't run, but these days I had been working on
adding some more fonts from Mr. Douros and I stumbled upon the right
wiki pages, so I went along.

For quite some time, a lot of distros ship the Alexander font, but not
the closely related Anaktoria, Aroania and Asea (this one comes in
Regular, Bold, Italic and Bold Italic), which I want to include. I
wrote up all the necessary files based on the ones I had prepared for
Alexander and made the packages [2],[3],[4]. Two local builds on f21
and f22 were successful, rpmlint only whined about what it thought
were typos and I went on to submit to koji scratch builds for rawhide,
which were also successful.

And then I fed them to repo-font-audit. That gave me an error (fonts
in packages that contain non-font data), a warning (fonts that do not
pass fontlint sanity checks) and a suggestion (fonts with partial
unicode block coverage). I have uploaded the full test results at [5].

Seeing that I could not do anything for the warning and the
suggestion, I tried to figure out what was the cause of the error, but
I did not reach any solid conclusion. What is the problem? Is it the
%doc part of the file, the metadata/fontconfig files or all of them
together?

That got me worried so, I decided to run a check against the other
gdouros fonts [6]. Of the seven fonts, repo-font-audit managed to
(Continue reading)

mayank25080562 | 14 Apr 21:34 2015
mayank25080562 | 16 Apr 08:42 2015
mayank25080562 | 15 Apr 03:21 2015
Parag Nemade | 26 Feb 05:29 2015
Picon

help with updating fontpackages

Hi Nicolas,

    I am planning to clean the spec file and source code to follow
current fedora packaging guidelines and update fontpackages in Fedora
22. I see that application to gitfontpackages requires applicant to
provide his contributions. As per this requirement, I have sent you an
email already.

Can you give me commit access to gitfontpackages repository.

Regards,
Parag.
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
Troy Dawson | 2 Jan 21:15 2015
Picon

Is anyone packaging Comic Neue ?

Hi,
I would like to get a free version of Comic into Fedora.

I looked at HVD Comic Serif. [1][2] It looks like it wasn't put in
Fedora because it's readme.txt has both the Creative Commons Attribution
3.0 Unported License and a bunch of freehand "though shalt" stuff at the
beginning.
Plus, that font has not been touched since 2009 (including the
problematic readme file)
Anyway, I don't see that making it into Fedora.

So, I was thinking of packaging Comic Neue [3], which is licensed until
the SIL Open Font License.  It is being actively maintained, and I think
would be a good addition to Fedora.

And, so my question.  Is anyone packaging Comic Neue up already?
If not, I'll give it a try.
I haven't ever packaged a font, but I'm more than willing to learn.  The
templates certainly look helpful.

Thanks
Troy Dawson

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/HVD_Comic_Serif_fonts
[2] http://www.hvdfonts.com/#15-HvD%20Comic%20Serif
[3] http://comicneue.com/
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
Picon

Reminder meeting:i18n 2014/12/10 06:00:00 UTC

Hi All,

    You are kindly invited to the meeting:
    i18n on 2014-12-03 from 06:00:00 to 07:00:00 UTC

    Agenda is available at [1]. Feel free to add and suggest topics.

    Action items from last meeting:
* pravins to find some dedicated time for i18n cleanup.
Best Regards,
Pravin Satpute


1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/I18N/Meetings/2014-12-10
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
Picon

Reminder meeting:i18n 2014/12/03 06:00:00 UTC

Hi All,

    Tomorrow couple of members will be not available for meeting. Still since this is final meeting before Fedora 21 release good to do the meeting and see if anything comes up or pending.

    You are kindly invited to the meeting:
    i18n on 2014-12-03 from 06:00:00 to 07:00:00 UTC

    Agenda is available at [1]. Feel free to add and suggest topics.

    Action items from last meeting:
    None


Best Regards,
Pravin Satpute


1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/I18N/Meetings/2014-12-03
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
Picon

[Announce] Next improved release of Lohit Devanagari 2.95.0 with Latin and ttfautohinted.

    Last release of Lohit Devanagari we did in Feb 19, 2014. During the time number of improvements happened in Lohit Devanagari. Today releasing its next version with all the improvements. [1]

    Following are the improvements:
    1. Added Latin from https://github.com/etunni/lohit-latin
            Yes, This happened :)
            I would like to thanks Dave for this, who helped to get Latin for Devanagari done from  Eduardo Rodriguez Tunni. Now one will not feel major difference while rendering of Lohit Devanagari text with Latin since Lohit has Latin coverage itself.

    2. One of the requirement of ttfautohint is to have Latin support in fonts. (AFAIK) Due to this we were not using ttfautohint for building Lohit Devanagari. Now since we have Latin in Lohit Devanagari, we have started building ttf with ttfautohint. It means Lohit Devanagari now requires ttfautohint as a build requirement.

    2. We started compiling feature file with Adobe font development kit. (AFDKO).
            As announced earlier as well.
            Feature file of Lohit Devanagari was not compiling in OTM. [2] Root cause of problem was fontforge is bit relax while validating feature file. Had good discussion with Dave and Frank on this and finally we decided to compile feature file with AFDKO. [3]

            This also helped us to futher identified issues in feature file and we fixed those issues in feature file.

    3. Updated sfd file with resolved issues regarding marathi locale (issue id on github: #46,#47)
            These were local related issues not tested well earlier.

    4. Improved Vedic accent positioning issues. Resolves issue #https://github.com/pravins/lohit2/issues/11

    5. Added new characters uni1cf5 and uni1cf6

    Looking forward for Dave's more support to add Latin in all Lohit script fonts. Enjoy improved version of Lohit Devanagari.  Please report if any issues at github [4]. I have updated fedorahosted.org/lohit [5] page with download details

    I want to verify Lohit Devanagari with Hindi script grammer [6] and make sure it follows all rules. Soon i am going to ping some linguist who can help into this.

Cheers,
Pravin Satpute
1. https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/o/lohit/lohit-devanagari-ttf-2.95.0.tar.gz
2. https://github.com/pravins/lohit2/issues/13
3. https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko
4. https://github.com/pravins/lohit/issues/new
5. https://fedorahosted.org/lohit/
6. http://www.tdil-dc.in/index.php?option=com_vertical&parentid=79&lang=en
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
Rajeesh K Nambiar | 16 Nov 18:22 2014
Picon

PT Serif and PT Mono fonts packaging

Hi,

I'd like to maintain/co-maintain PT Serif[1] and PT Mono[2] fonts by
paratype. Would it be better to include them in the existing PT
Sans[3] fonts package - incorporate in the same spec as multiple
packages, or as individual specs?

Here's the altered spec file[4] and srpm[5] combining all 3 paratype
fonts. (Note the hack in %prep phase due to source packages containing
same file names). What do you think?

[1] http://www.paratype.com/uni/public/PTSerif.zip
[2] http://www.paratype.com/uni/public/PTMono.zip
[3] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/paratype-pt-sans-fonts/
[4] https://rajeeshknambiar.fedorapeople.org/spec/paratype-pt-fonts.spec
[5] https://rajeeshknambiar.fedorapeople.org/srpm/paratype-pt-fonts-20111230-1.fc20.src.rpm

--

-- 
Rajeesh
http://rajeeshknambiar.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/

Gmane