On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Nicolas Spalinger
<nicolas_spalinger(a)sil.org> wrote:
On 11/16/2014 05:22 PM, Rajeesh K Nambiar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to maintain/co-maintain PT Serif[1] and PT Mono[2] fonts by
> paratype. Would it be better to include them in the existing PT
> Sans[3] fonts package - incorporate in the same spec as multiple
> packages, or as individual specs?
>
> Here's the altered spec file[4] and srpm[5] combining all 3 paratype
> fonts. (Note the hack in %prep phase due to source packages containing
> same file names). What do you think?
>
> [1]
http://www.paratype.com/uni/public/PTSerif.zip
> [2]
http://www.paratype.com/uni/public/PTMono.zip
Thanks for taking care of packaging these fonts!
BTW, I suspect you want
http://www.fontstock.com/public/PTSerifOFL.zip
http://www.fontstock.com/public/PTMonoOFL.zip
instead of the ones with Paratype's very own incompatible foundry-specific license.
The links are not prominently displayed but the .zip files are still there.
Thank you all for the inputs, greatly helpful. As Nicolas Mahilot also
suggested, I will open separate review requests for PT Serif and PT
Mono fonts and use the OFL source.
nim, how did you check for Unicode codepoint correctness in the fonts?
--
Rajeesh