[Bug 230560] Review Request: wqy-bitmap-fonts - a fine-tuned Chinese bitmap font

[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: wqy-bitmap-fonts - a fine-tuned Chinese bitmap font


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230560


petersen at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|Review Request: wqy-bitmap- |Review Request: wqy-bitmap-
                   |fonts - a fine-tuned CJK    |fonts - a fine-tuned Chinese
                   |bitmap font                 |bitmap font




------- Additional Comments From petersen at redhat.com  2007-04-11 08:46 EST -------
Ok I tested the font now in gedit.  While it looks nice I can't honestly
say that the font is suitable for native Japanese.  The kana (hiragana
and katakana) look fine, (though I noticed some misalignment between some
hiragana and other glyphs at 10 and 11pt), but the kanji do standout in eyes
of Japanese i am afraid.  (I can attach some screenshots if you are interested
to see some examples.:)


A few more comments:

- Is there any particular reason for using a subdir (wenquanyi/wqy-bitmapfont)
  for the fonts?  Do you expect other fonts in wenquanyi/ in the future?

- You don't really need to include all the upstream changelog details in
  spec file at least not for the initial package.

Usually starting with something like:

%changelog
*Sun Feb 18 2007 Qianqian Fang <fangq at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> 0.8.0-1
- initial packaging for Fedora (#230560)

would be sufficient.

- I see wqy-bitmapfont-pcf-0.8.1-7.tar.gz was released upstream,
  after wqy-bitmapfont-pcf-0.8.0-6.tar.gz, how about changing the upstream
  version numbering scheme?  Eg why not just number the next release
  wqy-bitmapfont-pcf-0.8.2.tar.gz say? :)

- AFAICT the md5sum of the tarball in the srpm and the one on sourceforge
are different.  The package tarball must be identical to the upstream released
tarball.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.