[Bug 526607] Review Request: openfontlibrary-smonohand-font - A handwritten monospace font

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=526607


Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?(michael.silvanus@ |
                   |gmail.com)                  |




--- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus at gmail.com>  2009-10-01 18:13:06 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Thank you for submitting a new font package for review. I hope you'll find the
> process smooth and friendly, please do not hesitate to tell us what could be
> made better if something bugs you.
> 
> Anyway, for the review
> 
> 1. we use oflb as prefix for openfontlibrary fonts 
Ah, thanks. That's why yum search openfont did not find anything of interest

> 2. the author claims he created this font in fontforge, so it'd be a good idea
> to beg for the sfd file upstream and build the font from source in the rpm
I'll contact him and ask.

> 3. there is no licensing trace in the ttf file, and web pages are unfortunately
> not future proof. Please ask upstream to release the font in a zip file that
> includes a detached .txt licensing file (or at least use the fontforge button
> that embeds the OFL text in the .ttf)
Ditto.

> 4. IMHO this font should be classified as "fantasy" not "monospace" (see
> fontconfig-generics.txt in fontpackages-devel)

> 
> 5. Why do you reference Droid Sans Mono in your fontconfig file? If that's
> because you cut and pasted from the Droid file, you have clean and documented
> fontconfig templates in fontpackages-devel (in
Em. Guilty as charged. I recently installed it, so when looking for a reference
spec, I looked there. Somehow I skipped over the notice at the top of the
packaging page.

> /usr/share/fontconfig/templates/). The lastest rawhide version is probably the
> best reference for anything ≥ F11 (I'll probably push it to F11 if I stop
> finding things to improve every other week)
I'm on Rawhide, so that's good.

> 6. IMHO it is wrong to alias Chalkboard or Comic Sans MS if you're not sure
> Smonohand is very close both in looks and metrics. The reason being looks only
> are not sufficient, if the letters are different sizes documents written will
> one of the other fonts will end up repaginated with smonohand. Usually when we
> alias a font is much closer than just 'looks like it'
Ah, OK.

>
> 7. 65 is probably too high a prio for a fantasy latin font,  63-64 should be
> fine (see fontconfig-priorities.txt)
Where's this file? I tried looking in fontpackages{,-devel} and
fontconfig{,-devel}. I was trying to go for as low a priority as possible,
since it looked that 50 is for a user override, and the number goes up from
there.

> For a first try this is a nice package, you just need to spend some time
> reading the little documentation we have in fontpackages-devel and you'll be
> fine.
> 
Will do that and reupload an updated spec later today, thanks for the feedback!

Actually, one more question: the font filename (TTF) -- is there a naming
convention? right now it has the author's name -- dalles_-_SMonohand.ttf

-- 
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.