From Fedora Project Wiki
(New page: This is already way better than what we have (which is nothing). When you are satisfied with the result please rename the page so its entry in the [[:Category:Fonts_packaging|fonts packagi...) |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This is already way better than what we have (which is nothing). | # This is already way better than what we have (which is nothing). | ||
When you are satisfied with the result please rename the page so its entry in the [[:Category:Fonts_packaging|fonts packaging index]] looks good. [[User:Nim|NicolasMailhot]] | # When you are satisfied with the result please rename the page so its entry in the [[:Category:Fonts_packaging|fonts packaging index]] looks good. | ||
# Do not refer to fonts as software, some authors disagree with this (even though smart font instructions '''are''' software) | |||
#* OK, fixed. -- PWF | |||
# I'm not sure a font author will think of his release as a "package" | |||
#* OK, fixed. -- PWF | |||
# Many authors won't have the faintest idea what Fedora is some Linux/OLPC/Red Hat references may help | |||
#* OK, added some reference to what Fedora is, and a link to our [[Overview]] page. -- PWF | |||
# Very often we do not know that foo is derived from bar — that's one of the questions we want to ask authors | |||
#* OK, added an example. -- PWF | |||
# It's often difficult to explain why we do not want to use pre-build hand-tuned fonts and insist on rebuilding from fontforge sources (when they are available) | |||
#* If you could try, I'll clean up the text. -- PWF | |||
# It's often very difficult to explain why forgetting to version archives or font files makes packager life hard | |||
#* If you could try, I'll clean up the text. -- PWF | |||
# Maybe some reference to [[Archive_template_for_fonts]] ? | |||
#* If that's a work in progress, it may be confusing to people who aren't FOSS-aware. Should that be completed first so it's more educational for font authors who aren't FOSS-aware? -- PWF | |||
[[User:Nim|NicolasMailhot]] 17:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:20, 25 July 2008
- This is already way better than what we have (which is nothing).
- When you are satisfied with the result please rename the page so its entry in the fonts packaging index looks good.
- Do not refer to fonts as software, some authors disagree with this (even though smart font instructions are software)
- OK, fixed. -- PWF
- I'm not sure a font author will think of his release as a "package"
- OK, fixed. -- PWF
- Many authors won't have the faintest idea what Fedora is some Linux/OLPC/Red Hat references may help
- OK, added some reference to what Fedora is, and a link to our Overview page. -- PWF
- Very often we do not know that foo is derived from bar — that's one of the questions we want to ask authors
- OK, added an example. -- PWF
- It's often difficult to explain why we do not want to use pre-build hand-tuned fonts and insist on rebuilding from fontforge sources (when they are available)
- If you could try, I'll clean up the text. -- PWF
- It's often very difficult to explain why forgetting to version archives or font files makes packager life hard
- If you could try, I'll clean up the text. -- PWF
- Maybe some reference to Archive_template_for_fonts ?
- If that's a work in progress, it may be confusing to people who aren't FOSS-aware. Should that be completed first so it's more educational for font authors who aren't FOSS-aware? -- PWF
NicolasMailhot 17:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)