[Bug 455153] Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: asana-math-fonts  - An OpenType font with a MATH table


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455153


nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
             Status|NEW                         |NEEDINFO
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?,
                   |                            |needinfo?(jonstanley at gmail.c
                   |                            |om)




------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net  2008-07-13 04:07 EST -------
Formal review:

OK  | MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package…
rpmlint *rpm
asana-math-fonts.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

However it's probably a good idea to package
ftp://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/Asana-Math/README.1ST
as %doc too

OK  | MUST: The package must be named according to the Package…
OK  | MUST: The spec file name must match the base package…
OK  | MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines…

NOK | MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved…
NOK | MUST: The License field in the package spec file must…

Unfortunately Asana claims to be OFL, but reuses material from pxfont which is 
GPL + Exception.
ftp://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/pxfonts/COPYRIGHT
Please contact the Asana author to check he got authorization from pxfonts 
authors to relicense the glyphs (a mail would be fine), and if not have him 
relicense Asana. If upstream has a relicensing authorization please package it 
as %doc. (you can also try to contact pxfonts authors)

N/A | MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the…
OK  | MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK  | MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.

-   | MUST: The sources used to build the package must match… 
Builds fine with upstream's material. If upstream uses fontforge and fontforge 
sources could be available, that would be even better.

OK  | MUST: The package must successfully compile and build…
N/A | MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build 
OK  | MUST: All build dependencies must be listed…
N/A | MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly…
N/A | MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared…
N/A | MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable…
OK  | MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates
OK  | MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files 
OK  | MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. 
OK  | MUST: Each package must have a %clean section
OK  | MUST: Each package must consistently use macros
OK  | MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable
N/A | MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc 
N/A | MUST: If a package includes something as %doc…
N/A | MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A | MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A | MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must…
N/A | MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix…
N/A | MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must…
N/A | MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, 
N/A | MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include…
OK  | MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already
OK  | MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST…
OK  | MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

NOK | SHOULD: If the source package does not include license 
Please ask upstream to publish a nice versionned zip with detached license file 
(and sfd sources?) while you're at it.

-   | SHOULD: The description and summary section … translations…
OK  | SHOULD: The package builds in mock
-   | SHOULD: The package builds on all supported architectures
OK  | SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package…
OK  | SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane…
N/A | SHOULD: Subpackages other than devel should usually require base…
N/A | SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on…
N/A | SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of shortlist…

Additional info
1. The font looks serify to me, not fantasy (fontconfig rule)
2. the embedded version has changed from CTAN to OFLB so presumably the author 
takes care or versionning there. You don't need to use a date as version.
3. if it gets approved do not forget to register in the engineering comps group
4. you can CC <fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com> 
<Openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org> and probably <ctan-ann at dante.de> to 
your exchanges with upstream
5. don't forget to update the wiki with the result of your investigations

Thank you very much for looking at Asana. I realise it's not as easy as it
should have been, but it would be insanely great to have it packaged, and our
scitech users would love to have it available


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.