Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: ipa-ex-mincho-fonts - Japanese Mincho-typeface OpenType font by IPA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Summary: Review Request: ipa-ex-mincho-fonts - Japanese Mincho-typeface OpenType font by IPA Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tagoh@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: ---
Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts-001.01... Description: IPAex Font is a Japanese OpenType fonts that is JIS X 0213:2004 compliant, provided by Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan.
This package contains Mincho style font.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org
--- Comment #1 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-03-01 08:17:54 EST --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/IPAex_Mincho_fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
--- Comment #2 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-04-19 22:25:46 EDT --- Updated:
Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts-001.01...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Daiki Ueno dueno@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |dueno@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |dueno@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Daiki Ueno dueno@redhat.com 2010-04-20 22:47:56 EDT --- Same issues as #569366 (ipa-ex-gothic-fonts) apply to the initial package and they are resolved in the new one. So I think it's ok.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
--- Comment #4 from Daiki Ueno dueno@redhat.com 2010-04-20 22:57:51 EDT --- Sorry, I overlooked that "Release" is not incremented and 'binding="same"' is still appears in a <match> element of ipa-ex-mincho-fonts-fontconfig.conf.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
--- Comment #5 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-05-17 06:01:30 EDT --- Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. updated spec file and srpm is available here:
Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts/ipa-ex-mincho-fonts-001.01...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Daiki Ueno dueno@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Daiki Ueno dueno@redhat.com 2010-05-23 22:13:24 EDT --- It looks ok with me.
BTW, is the priority setting (65-2-) really necessary or chosen for consistency with ipa-ex-gothic-fonts? Asking because I'm just curious about the relationship between this font and other mincho fonts (they are all assigned priority 66-).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-05-25 23:19:09 EDT --- Thanks for review.
Well, that priority setting are rquired to avoid overriding by 65-nonlatin.conf since it also contains some mincho-typeface fonts.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: ipa-ex-mincho-fonts Short Description: Japanese Mincho-typeface OpenType font by IPA Owners: tagoh Branches: devel F-13 F-12 F-11 InitialCC: i18n-team fonts-sig
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
--- Comment #8 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-05-26 01:39:27 EDT --- Ah, didn't catch up the mail. that's ok without F-11 branch.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Dennis Gilmore dennis@ausil.us changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #9 from Dennis Gilmore dennis@ausil.us 2010-05-27 18:40:42 EDT --- CVS Done
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #10 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-05-28 00:53:34 EDT --- Apparently there are no F-13 and F-12 branches though. do I need to wait some time?
set ? to fedora-cvs again to grab someone.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #11 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2010-05-28 10:50:56 EDT --- Indeed, I don't see those branches. I've created them.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569368
Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #12 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-05-31 22:37:54 EDT --- Thanks. the package has been imported and built.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org