https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307238
--- Comment #21 from Alexander Ploumistos <alex.ploumistos(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #20)
Good call. I just checked, and gnome-software shows the font without
trouble
(although with a big "no screenshot provided" empty box, but that's a
separate issue).
From the AppStream documentation:
"If the font metadata does not define an own screenshot, the AppStream
generator is supposed to render one or multiple sample images using the
respective font."
In my opinion, having maintainers provide their own screenshots for fonts
without strict guidelines in place would hurt consistency. I can see its
usefulness for something like hieroglyphics, but for anything else we should
probably stick with the lazy dog and friends.
> Just out of curiosity though, how would such a metapackage
complicate things? Wouldn't it work like the libreoffice metapackage which doesn't
have to be installed in order to get some features of the suite?
It wouldn't. It's just yet another package that needs an occasional release
and update, etc.
For the record, I went with a gdouros-textfonts-doc subpackage, which every
other font package in the family recommends.
Btw, in "My Requests" section of pkgdb, this package and its master branch are
still listed as approved and pending respectively. I set f22 & f23 to
"Obsolete", but nothing changed. None of the other packages I've introduced
is
listed there, so I don't think it's the default behavior. Let's see what
happens after the move to pagure.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.