Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/fed500/bungee-fonts/bungee-fonts.git/tree/bungee-fonts.spec?h=f34 COPR URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/bungee-fonts/ Description: OTF fonts from https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee These fonts are helpful for making Fedora Magazine images https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-magazine/creating-an-image/#_fonts , but are not yet packaged for Fedora. SPEC file draws from https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fira-code-fonts/tree/rawhide https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/vernnobile-oswald-fonts/tree/rawhide https://pagure.io/fontpackages/blob/master Fedora Account System Username: fed500
Do read new fonts packaging guidelines https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/FontsPolicy and write SPEC file according to it. You can take examples like https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/aajohan-comfortaa-fonts/blob/rawhide/f/aajohan-comfortaa-fonts.spec https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/astigmatic-grand-hotel-fonts/blob/rawhide/f/astigmatic-grand-hotel-fonts.spec
Thanks for the review. Updated the name and spec file: Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/fed500/djr-bungee-fonts/djr-bungee-fonts.git/tree/djr-bungee-fonts.spec?h=f34 COPR URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/djr-bungee-fonts/ The following seem related - maybe some changes are needed to ensure debuginfo is does not get packaged: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6863 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config//blob/rawhide/f/buildflags.md The release itself does not contain the documentation files that are available on GitHub at https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee Should these be added as Source2 ?
Some more changes are needed to get the proper names of the styles/weights - Regular, Inline, Outline, Shadow and Shade.
Foundry is DJR https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee/issues/74
Weight naming problems in Inkscape and Gimp seem related to how these are implemented in these applications, and names appear correctly in text editors such as Kwrite and Gedit.
When you write font family you need to write only family name and not with its style name. This packaging looks complex to me. If you only want to package "Bungee_Desktop" fonts then there should be 13 subpackages to be created. See Bungee/Bungee-Hairline.otf:Family: Bungee Hairline Bungee/Bungee-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Inline Bungee/Bungee-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Outline Bungee/Bungee-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Regular Bungee/Bungee-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Shade BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Inline BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Outline BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Regular BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Shade BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Inline BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Outline BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Regular BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Shade as seen above, use family name as shown above for those 13 sub-packages. Then you can also add 3 more meta subpackages like djr-bungee-fonts-all, djr-bungee-layers-fonts-all and djr-bungee-layers-rotated-fonts-all. Then one final subpackage called djr-bungee-desktop-fonts-all that installs djr-bungee-fonts-all, djr-bungee-layers-fonts-all and djr-bungee-layers-rotated-fonts-all. The final specfile should generate 17 binary rpms. I suggest name this package as djr-bungee-desktop-fonts. These are just my suggestions, need to check if it can be implemented. I saw you need sponsorship in Fedora packager group. Have you submitted anymore packages or you already tried reviewing other contributor's packages? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you are new RPM packager and want to package some software in Fedora then you will need Sponsorship for your package. To get sponsor for your package in packager group, please follow these things. Make sure you have followed steps given on https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/ We have this process, https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/How_to_Get_Sponsored_into_the_Packager_Group/ to get sponsored into the packager group. When you submit your first submission, it will be good if you either submit few more packages and/or do some full detailed package reviews. This is needed to make sure package submitter understands the rpm packaging well and follows the fedora packaging guidelines. Check more on this at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/How_to_Get_Sponsored_into_the_Packager_Group/#convincing_someone_to_sponsor_you Please go through the following links 1) https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Review_Process/ 2) https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ 3) To find the packages already submitted for review, check http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ 4) https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/ and https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Review_Process/#_reviewer is useful while doing package reviews. 5) https://pagure.io/FedoraReview this is fedora-review tool to help review packages in fedora. You need to use this and do un-official package reviews of packages submitted by other contributors. While doing so mention "This is un-official review of the package." at top of your review comment. You can install this tool on your Fedora system by running command "sudo dnf install fedora-review" Good to review packages listed in https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/reviewable.html or https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/needsponsor.html When you do full package review of some packages, provide that review comment link here so that I can look how you have reviewed those packages. An example command to run fedora-review on any package review bugzilla is fedora-review -b <bugid> -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 If you got any questions please do ask here. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can refer to some already implemented multi-family font packaging examples as https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/culmus-fonts/blob/rawhide/f/culmus-fonts.spec https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/khmer-os-fonts/blob/rawhide/f/khmer-os-fonts.spec I think khmer-os-fonts is best example for you to follow for bungee desktop font packaging.
Thanks for the suggestions. Have one other ticket https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813687 Made some comments on libarrow (have made some contributions to the main Arrow project): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2054708#c14 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055596
Thanks. I will sponsor you once this package gets approved.
There are also Bungee Basic (ttf), Bungee ColorFonts (ttf, html, woff and woff2) and Bungee Web (eot, woff and woff2) Fonts. As such, maybe the following is reasonable: Bungee/Bungee-Hairline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Hairline Bungee/Bungee-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Inline Bungee/Bungee-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Outline Bungee/Bungee-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Regular Bungee/Bungee-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Shade BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Inline BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Outline BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Regular BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Shade BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Rotated Inline BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Rotated Outline BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Rotated Regular BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Desktop Layers Rotated Shade Bungee_Color/BungeeColor-Regular_svg.ttf:Family Bungee Color With metapackages djr-bungee-desktop-fonts-all djr-bungee-desktop-standard-fonts-all djr-bungee-desktop-layers-fonts-all djr-bungee-desktop-layers-rotated-fonts-all and djr-bungee-fonts-all More information on color fonts is available at https://color.typekit.com/ It seems that at least the desktop fonts could be compiled with fontmake - https://github.com/googlefonts/fontmake though at present, only the compiled versions are packaged. This also seems relevant for Hack fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1258542
Removed desktop as per the guidelines, it is the standard package: Bungee/Bungee-Hairline.otf:Family: Bungee Hairline Bungee/Bungee-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Inline Bungee/Bungee-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Outline Bungee/Bungee-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Regular Bungee/Bungee-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Shade BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Inline BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Outline BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Regular BungeeLayers/BungeeLayers-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Shade BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Inline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Inline BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Outline.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Outline BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Regular.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Regular BungeeLayersRotated/BungeeLayersRotated-Shade.otf:Family: Bungee Layers Rotated Shade Bungee_Color/BungeeColor-Regular_svg.ttf:Family Bungee Color With metapackages djr-bungee-desktop-fonts-all djr-bungee-standard-fonts-all djr-bungee-layers-fonts-all djr-bungee-layers-rotated-fonts-all and djr-bungee-fonts-all
OTF files can be generated from sources using https://github.com/googlefonts/ufo2ft but this is not yet packaged, and it seems to be developing relatively quickly. Related upstream discussion at https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee/issues/76
ufo2ft was packaged previously https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-ufo2ft/blob/f28/f/python-ufo2ft.spec
Maybe try un-retiring python-ufo2ft package. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#claiming and then submit initial work of this package that is SPEC and SRPM.
Unofficial review in progress for fbf-ani-fonts - Script like Bengali Font https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051879
ufo2ft has a dependency on skia-pathops which would also be useful for fonttools https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fonttools/blob/rawhide/f/fonttools.spec skia-pathops is not used by default: https://github.com/googlefonts/ufo2ft/blob/main/Lib/ufo2ft/filters/removeOverlaps.py#L14 https://github.com/googlefonts/ufo2ft/blob/main/Lib/ufo2ft/preProcessor.py#L132 and is required as an extra: https://github.com/googlefonts/ufo2ft/blob/main/setup.py#L37 Initial rebuild of ufo2ft does not include skia-pathops: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/python3-ufo2ft/
Started process of unretiring ufo2ft https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091310
Another package am working on, though unrelated to fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091389
Unofficial review of python-google-cloud-pubsub https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2092637
Unofficial review of sfnt2woff-zopfli https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091282
Unofficial review of bfs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087264
Unofficial review of libmd: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094582 Unofficial review of libaiff: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094422
Unofficial review of daniel-wikholm-segment16-fonts : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095732
Unofficial review of sfsexp: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095717
Unofficial review of simdjson: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2096621 Unofficial review of giza: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187030
Unofficial review of Gearhead II: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2098373 Unofficial review of golang-github-derekparker-trie: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2098379
Unofficial review of starkbank-ecdsa: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101458
Unofficial review of python-pynvim: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2105127
Unofficial review of rust-cap: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2105887
Unofficial review of python-railroad-diagrams: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2107355
Unofficial review of blueprint-compiler: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2106919
Unofficial review of vim-mediawiki: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2107962
Unofficial review of python-pyvat: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109069
Unofficial review of libodiosacd: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2110108
Unofficial review of ugrep: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109340 Unofficial review of v: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2042701 Packaging PT Astra serif font: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112636 Packaging PT Astra sans font: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112639
Unofficial review basez: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2113075
Sorry I just remembered this bug and saw I missed above comments about your unofficial reviews. I am surprised being assignee of this bug I did not received any update from this bug since 28th May 2022. Anyways, I have sponsored you now :)
Many thanks for sponsorship. Did not want to clutter inboxes.
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the submitter to proceed with the review. If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take this ticket. Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.
(In reply to Package Review from comment #39) > This is an automatic check from review-stats script. > > This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems > that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please > respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the > submitter to proceed with the review. > > If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the > fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take > this ticket. > > Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted. Hey you seems really funny. I know you are a bot but you should needinfo both the parties here.
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #0) > Spec URL: > https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/fed500/bungee-fonts/bungee- > fonts.git/tree/bungee-fonts.spec?h=f34 > > COPR URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/bungee-fonts/ > > Description: OTF fonts from https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee > These fonts are helpful for making Fedora Magazine images > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-magazine/creating-an-image/ > #_fonts , but are not yet packaged for Fedora. > > SPEC file draws from > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fira-code-fonts/tree/rawhide > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/vernnobile-oswald-fonts/tree/rawhide > https://pagure.io/fontpackages/blob/master > > Fedora Account System Username: fed500 Do submit this package again as I can't access your copr repo.
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience.
Will update this.