Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ecolier-court-fonts - Écolier court fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261881
------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net 2008-07-12 11:03 EST -------
(In reply to comment #31)
> (In reply to comment #30)
> > (In reply to comment #29)
> >
> > > Using weird characters to enumerate changelog entries to annoy the people who
> > > expressed concern about this is just childish.
>
> I found that utf8 illustrated changelog very funny.
Thank you.
> The issue is not with utf8 in the changelog but with different
> characters for each line, though, here, they are admitedly meaningful.
I try to write meaningful changelogs and the UTF-8 bits are part of it. Like any
maintainer, sometimes I succeed, sometimes not.
> This may be fun for the reviewers and fedora maintainers, for the user
> I think that it is likely to be scary.
Almost any changelog, with UTF-8 or not is going to be scary for users.
> More generally, I like the check character for the changelog item,
> but I find the smiling face not very relevant, maybe a watch (231A) would be
> better?
I've reverted to - for the version line since sadly that's what rpmlint insists
on and I don't want to upset reviewers that don't understand it does not change
anything.
However if you review this package I can sprinkle watches there if you want :p
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ecolier-court-fonts - Écolier court fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261881
------- Additional Comments From pertusus(a)free.fr 2008-07-12 10:49 EST -------
(In reply to comment #30)
> (In reply to comment #29)
>
> > Using weird characters to enumerate changelog entries to annoy the people who
> > expressed concern about this is just childish.
I found that utf8 illustrated changelog very funny.
> Changelog is UTF-8 land and this has never been contested. There are scores (if
> not more) of packages in Fedora now (and for several versions) that have UTF-8
> there. It passes rpmlint fine (modulo the new nobreakspace warning someone added
> without checking it actually worked)
The issue is not with utf8 in the changelog but with different
characters for each line, though, here, they are admitedly meaningful.
This may be fun for the reviewers and fedora maintainers, for the user
I think that it is likely to be scary.
More generally, I like the check character for the changelog item,
but I find the smiling face not very relevant, maybe a watch (231A) would be
better?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ecolier-court-fonts - Écolier court fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261881
------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net 2008-07-12 10:21 EST -------
(In reply to comment #29)
> Using weird characters to enumerate changelog entries to annoy the people who
> expressed concern about this is just childish.
Changelog is UTF-8 land and this has never been contested. There are scores (if
not more) of packages in Fedora now (and for several versions) that have UTF-8
there. It passes rpmlint fine (modulo the new nobreakspace warning someone added
without checking it actually worked)
I'm sorry if you can't envision that someone working on extending the
distribution unicode support does not limit himself to ASCII. If I agreed with
you I wouldn't be packaging those in the first place.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: bitstream-vera-fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225618
nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
Flag| |needinfo?(besfahbo(a)redhat.co
| |m)
------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net 2008-07-12 10:13 EST -------
In addition please add a wiki page on this package on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Packaged_fonts
using the following template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_description_template
This won't make the package any better but will give Google and our users some
visibility on available fonts in Fedora, contributing to our world domination plan.
That's all for this review. Reciprocating with a review of bug #261881, bug
#452663, bug #454175, or even bug #454176 would be appreciated
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: bitstream-vera-fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225618
------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net 2008-07-12 10:03 EST -------
Formal review:
OK | MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package…
rpmlint *rpm
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK | MUST: The package must be named according to the Package…
OK | MUST: The spec file name must match the base package…
NOK | MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines…
There's nothing terribly wrong with the package, but our font guidelines have
evolved a little since it was created, and it's time to re-sync it with the
fonts spec template in rpmdevtools. (since it's unlikely a new upstream
version will ever cause a package refresh)
I like to see a minimal diff when I compare a font spec to the current
template in meld.
OK | MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved…
OK | MUST: The License field in the package spec file must…
OK | MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the…
OK | MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK | MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK | MUST: The sources used to build the package must match…
OK | MUST: The package must successfully compile and build…
N/A | MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build
OK | MUST: All build dependencies must be listed…
N/A | MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly…
N/A | MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared…
N/A | MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable…
OK | MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates
OK | MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files
OK | MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
OK | MUST: Each package must have a %clean section
OK | MUST: Each package must consistently use macros
OK | MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable
N/A | MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc
N/A | MUST: If a package includes something as %doc…
N/A | MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A | MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A | MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must…
N/A | MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix…
N/A | MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must…
N/A | MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives,
N/A | MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include…
OK | MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already
OK | MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST…
OK | MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
N/A | SHOULD: If the source package does not include license
- | SHOULD: The description and summary section … translations…
OK | SHOULD: The package builds in mock
- | SHOULD: The package builds on all supported architectures
OK | SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package…
OK | SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane…
N/A | SHOULD: Subpackages other than devel should usually require base…
N/A | SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on…
N/A | SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of shortlist…
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ecolier-court-fonts - Écolier court fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261881
------- Additional Comments From rpm(a)greysector.net 2008-07-12 09:59 EST -------
* Sat Jul 12 2008 <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net>
- 20070702-1
⚱ Stop waiting for upstream to answer distribution change requests
♔ FESCO chickened out on UTF-8 names
♿ FESCO decision unimplementable due to bug #455119
⚙ Sync spec style with the way our font packaging guidelines have evolved
⚤ Package both fonts in a single package
I'm going to consider they are two faces of the same font
∞ Register in new fontconfig generic families
Using weird characters to enumerate changelog entries to annoy the people who
expressed concern about this is just childish.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: bitstream-vera-fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225618
nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag| |fedora-review?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: bitstream-vera-fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225618
nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net 2008-07-12 09:44 EST -------
Ok, since this is languishing in neither-land I'll do a formal review now (seems
I've spent the week reviewing font packages anyway)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: bitstream-vera-fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225618
nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: khmeros-fonts - Khmer free/libre font set created by Danh Hong of the Cambodian Open Institute
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454078
nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net |mnowak(a)redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.