[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

[Fabian Greffrath]

[Resending to the bug's address.]

Hi all!

Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2016, 01:11 +1200 schrieb Ben Caradoc-Davies:
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Fedora 25 is still scheduled to use Liberation 1.

I didn't even know (or maybe simply forgot) that Fedora reverted back
to using Liberation 1.x for quality concerns. If this is still the
case, as you state it, we should maybe follow suit and simply re-
upload 
the previous package as 1:1.07.4-2 (i.e. with an epoch).

> 
> I think this was a sensible decision as the new SIL licence and
> extra 
> glyphs do not in my view compensate for the loss of decent hinting. 
> Liberation 1 was a magnificent achievement and is still a good
> choice 
> today. It is by no means obsolete. I am yet to find another open
> source 
> font family that is as readable and versatile and also plays nicely
> with 
> > 
> > fontconfig.

The Google CrOS Core Fonts in the fonts-croscore package are mostly the
same as the Liberation 2.x fonts with changed names. It would be
interesting if you could provide a critical review with regard to
hinting. I myself seem to be mostly blind to such subtle details. :/

> 
> Perhaps a fonts-liberation1 and fonts-liberation2 that "Breaks:"
> each 
> other and both provide the same virtual package? Ideally the virtual 
> package would be called fonts-liberation, but this is taken by the 
> current non-virtual package. I do not know the cleanest way to handle
> a 
> transition from a non-virtual to a virtual package. This might
> require 
> the advice of an apt guru.

We could still have both font versions in separate packages with
slightly different names and simple Breaks relations. No virtual
packages and Apt Voodoo required.

> 
> Splitting out the condensed (I think they call it narrow?) font might
> be 
> unnecessary complexity at this stage.

If we re-introduced fonts-liberation 1.x with a different package name,
we'd have to pass the NEW queue again, anyway. So, splitting the
condensed style into a separate package would be no problem.

Thanks for your comments!

 - Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/attachments/20160826/f80ed766/attachment.sig>