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
--- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silvanus@gmail.com 2009-10-01 18:42:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6)
- 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.
- 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.
OFLB's web contact form is currently broken, so I'm not sure whether the message I sent actually got through or not. I'm checking on IRC to see if anyone could fix it.
- 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.
Ignore my silliness here. I was typing fontpackage, not fontpackages, and grep swallowed the error.
Actually, one more question: the font filename (TTF) -- is there a naming convention? right now it has the author's name -- dalles_-_SMonohand.ttf
Also, presumably the suffix -fonts stays regardless of whether the package contains only one font or more.