Problems detected in the artwiz-aleczapka-fonts rawhide package!

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Dear packager,

At 20091029T192211Z, while scanning the rawhide repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-rawhide-current/x86_64/
I have identified the following problems in your artwiz-aleczapka-fonts package:

SRPM                    RPM                     4   7  11  17  19
artwiz-aleczapka-fonts  artwiz-aleczapka-fonts  48  3  48  48  48
                        Total                   48  3  48  48  48

4. Fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata

    ☛ Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to
    work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at
    package creation time.


7. Fonts that declare non-WWS compliant styles

    ☛ This WWS-like test checks if font styles use the “Width Weight Slant” naming
    convention¹. As noted by Adobe the CSS family model is less than ideal, but
    it's a standard and applications expect it².
    
    Since our applications do not workaround bad font naming with dynamic
    renaming heuristics, achieving consistent style naming that can be used in
    CSS/web oriented applications requires fixing face naming directly in the
    font files. For this reason we test font style naming separately from font
    family naming, and do not support complex weight abbreviations and
    suffixes³.
    
    To pass this test make sure your style names do not include any qualifier
    not defined in the WWS whitepaper¹, and that “Width”, “Weight” or “Slant”
    are defined only once. Any other qualifier belongs in the font family name.
    
    If one your font files is listed here please ask its upstream to fix its
    naming so it does not need further reprocessing. And in the meanwhile patch
    it (if it is available in sfd form) or add a fontconfig rule to your
    package to hide the problem⁴.
    
    ¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
    http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf
    ² http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20&%20OT%2015.pdf
    ³ As defined in the end of the WWS renaming algorithm described in the
    Microsoft whitepaper.
    ⁴ cf the “fontpackages” remapping template; unfortunately this workaround
    won't fix problems for non-fontconfig applications, or when
    interoperating with other systems.


11. Packages that mix different font families

    ☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
    per font package.
    
    (If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
    may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).


17. Fonts with partial script coverage

    ☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to be
    accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
    could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
    
    To check a font file script coverage, run fc-query with FC_DEBUG=256 and
    look for lines like: script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
    
    For example “mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }” means fontconfig will accept the tested
    file for Maori if codepoints 1e34 and 1e35 are added.
    
    If you feel fontconfig is requiring a glyph which is not strictly necessary
    for a particular script, report the problem upstream².
    
    ¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
    ² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig


19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks

    ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
    the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
    behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
    reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
    fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
    
    You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
    
    ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html

Please take the appropriate measures to fix the artwiz-aleczapka-fonts package.

I will warn you again if I find problems next time I am ran.

Your friendly QA robot,

-- 
repo-font-audit
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: artwiz-aleczapka-fonts.tar.xz
Type: application/x-xz-compressed-tar
Size: 24160 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fonts-bugs/attachments/20091029/7d48b4cd/attachment.bin