[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#974150: Bug#974150: Noto Mono looks completely different after upgrade

Jonas Smedegaard jonas at jones.dk
Tue Nov 10 19:34:10 GMT 2020

Quoting Steinar H. Gunderson (2020-11-10 20:08:14)
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 07:46:55PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Why the severity?
> > 
> > Visual changes does not seem reason release-critical to me.
> > 
> > "completely broken" need more than a vague suspicion, IMHO.
> Feel free to downgrade. The background for the severity: I installed 
> the package to get a specific font, and that font suddenly disappeared 
> and was replaced by a completely different font. For me, that's 
> completely broken. If it's by intention, well... perhaps I'll need to 
> pin the old one indefinitely, then.

I am open to the alternative of packaging the old Noto Mono e.g. as 
package fonts-noto-mono-legacy which then conflicts with the new 
fonts-noto-mono package.

...if relevant to preserve two different visual styles.

I am a bit confused if we are tracking one or two bugs here...

Would you still find it relevant to pin the old font even if the new one 
works but simply uses different visual style?

Or rephrased: Is this bugreport not really about different look but 
instead _only_ about font disappearing altogether (and the different 
look just being a possible aid in locating the cause of that other 
bigger problem)?

> > Google dropped Noto Mono a few years ago.  We kept it alive, until 
> > recently when Google re-introduced Noto Mono.
> Huh, OK. But why is the web font different from the .ttf, then? It 
> doesn't make a lot of sense.
> If I download the .ttf from https://www.google.com/get/noto/, it looks 
> like the one in stable. And https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts 
> doesn't list any “Noto Mono” at all except “Noto Sans Mono”. Where's 
> this new font coming from?

Source for Debian package is https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/ 
- but interestingly, the NotoMono fonts was renamed just 2 days after 
our latest snapshot - with a totally unrevealing commit message of 
"Published NotoTraditionalNushu hinted and unhinted static instances":

Seems Google changed their mind regarding the reuse of font name, and we 
can go back to keeping the old legacy font alive...

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/attachments/20201110/b1d9a96c/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list