On 7/29/19 8:31 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
It's worth keeping an eye on https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386
Yep -- great issue to keep an eye on. "I was told that you intentionally removed support for this, is that true?" "Yes, that's why the blog post said so." "Well, but what are the upstream developers of pango-based applications supposed to do then?" "Nothing, there is no replacement. Pango doesn't support bitmap fonts anymore. Just like it said in the blog post." "Are bitmap fonts deprecated?" "..."
If you look at the ‘History’ tab of https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/63297 you'll see I asked for this link to be added to the issue but that was refused. The mentioned blog post, deemed sufficent, leaves the reader stranded.
Reading the linked issue will leave users just as stranded. So, I guess I'm a bit curious why you're so dead set on adding a link to the bug tracker. Do you know what a bug tracker is? It's a place for, well, tracking bugs. For triaging them, filtering based on their triage status, and discussing the efforts which have been expended towards fixing them. *There is no bug and nothing to fix. Pango does not support bitmap fonts anymore, and nothing other than convincing upstream to change their minds will make that stop being the case.* Since this is *not* the first time you've had this issue, Ralph, I would like to ask you: what is your divergent opinion on what a bugtracker is? - A personal mechanism to pass notes addressed to Eli Schwartz? (That last reopen request...) Please use email instead... Submitting a reopen request with the sole effort of arguing with the Bug Wranglers about why "you're wrong" for repeatedly refusing to reopen it, is *not* a productive way to discuss the matter. - A bulletin board for disseminating "vital" information to Arch users? If it's that important, we have a news feed. - A place for users to get together and discuss migration options? That's what a forum is for. - A place to collect all sorts of information on a subject, organize it into topics, index it for speedy access by users, and establish as the authoritative source for most of the Linux world to research, discover, and share information on the topic? It sounds like you've just described the famous Arch Wiki! Why are you so supremely dead set on necromantically raising a dead subject on the bugtracker, where it is difficult to find as well as being offtopic, when you could write a whole thesis paper on the subject, free of charge, on the wiki, and: - get thanked - have people ask you to write even more - provide a resource that, even next year or next decade, will be easily found and receive lots of visibility with no need to search - get a better page ranking in google while simultaneously raising the page ranking for the rest of the wiki Why do you insist on hiding information in the bugtracker where only Arch users today will find it, and Arch users tomorrow will *not* find it, nor will Debian or Fedora or Slackware or XXXX users ever find it at all (because they're not following recent Arch activity during the pango release cycle, and by the time some stable distro gets the pango update, everything has blown over). Please devote your wonderful desire to help out and share knowledge, in the recommended direction: improving the canonical documentation. :) It would be great if you could add a troubleshooting section to the Fonts article or something. If there was some sort of stable mechanism for indexing the information, and allowing users to update and refine their suggestions for living in a post-1.44 pango world, then I could even be convinced that it's worth adding a note to the bugtracker to that effect. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User